M/S.sahney Kirkwood Private Limited, Mumbai v. The Additional Commissioner Of Income-Tax,Range 10(2), Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2927 OF 2010 ANDINCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1496 OF 2007 M/s.Sahney Kirkwood Private Limited, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus The Additional Commissioner of Income-tax,Range 10(2), Mumbai..Respondent. Mr.V. Murlidhar with Mr.B.G. Yeole i/by M/s.Rajesh Shah & Co. for the appellant.Mr.Suresh Kumar for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & A.A. Sayed, JJ. P.C. : DATE : 29[th] July, 2011. 1.These two appeals are admitted on the following substantial questions of law. (A)Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the leave and licence agreement between the appellant and Minicon Insulated Wires Limited (Minicon for short) was a sham transaction so as to tax the amount received by Minicon by letting out the premises in the hands of the assessee ?agreement between the appellant and Minicon Insulated Wires Limited (Minicon for short) was a sham transaction so as to tax the amount received by Minicon by letting out the premises in the hands of the assessee ? (B)Whether the ITAT was justified in holding that the income received by the assessee on giving the premises in question on leave and licence basis was chargeable to tax under the head income from house property instead of business income ?the assessee on giving the premises in question on leave and licence basis was chargeable to tax under the head income from house property instead of business income ? 2.Counsel for the parties state that the first question raised in this appeal is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Court in the assessee's own case, being Income Tax Appeal No.1501 of 2007, decided today i.e. 29th July 2011. Accordingly, the first question is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The learned Counsel for the appellant does not press the second question, in view of our answer to the first question. 2.Both the appeals are accordingly disposed off with no order as to costs. (A.A. Sayed, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)