The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 10, Mumbai v. M/S.yashwantilika Hospital Private Limited, Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2067 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 10, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus M/s.Yashwantilika Hospital Private Limited, Mumbai ..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &K.K. Tated, JJ. P.C. : DATE : 16th September 2011 1.The question of law raised in this appeal reads thus : “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in directing the assessing officer to compute the income from house property of the assessee company on the basis of the rent actually received by the assessee company even though the assessing officer had brought on record that the fair rental value of the property of a shop in the same premises stood at a much higher value ?” 2.The respondent – assessee is established for the purpose of providing treatment and medical facilities to the peoples who are suffering from heart-disease. The assessee owns a building in which these activities are carried out. Part of the premises in that building were let out on rent to a doctor and the rental income received from the said doctor was offered to tax. The assessing officer was of the opinion that instead of the rent actually received by the assessee, the fair rental value of the said premises has to be treated to have been received by the assessee and accordingly enhanced the rental income received by the assessee on notional basis. 3.The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in para-7 of its order has recorded a finding that the assessing officer has failed to take into account that whole property has not been given on rent and only part of the first floor premises was given to Dr.Chetan Shah at a rent of Rs.15,000/- per month as he was a cardiac specialist and his services could be required in the hospital at any time in case of emergency. Thus, the premises were given to a doctor with a specific purpose and not for commercial purposes. 4.In these circumstances, in our opinion, the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in deleting the notional income cannot be faulted. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (K.K. Tated, J.)(J.P. Devadhar, J.)