SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 12833

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (KOLKATA BENCH)
Rajesh Kumar, AM, Pradip Kumar Choubey, JM
Ambuja Neotia Hotel Ventures Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
DCIT, Circle-7(1), Kolkata – Respondent
I.T.A. No. 224/Kol/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCA
For the Respondents: Shri V. Vidhyadhar, CITDR

Rental income from letting out commercial properties is assessable as business income if the main objects of the company include letting out properties and the activity is carried out systematically, consistently with past treatment, to earn profit.

Headnote:(A) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 22, 28, 143(3), 250, 142(1), 145(3) - Rental Income - Classification under 'Income from House Property' vs 'Profits and Gains from Business' - The primary issue is whether rental income from letting out commercial properties is assessable as business income or income from house property, considering the main objects of the company's Memorandum of Association and the nature of the business activities. (Paras 2, 8, 10, 11, 12)

(B) Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 22 to 26 - Specific Provisions - The specific provisions for taxing rental income under 'House Property' (Sections 22 to 26) do not automatically override the business head if the letting activity is part of the assessee's business, especially when the main objects of the company include letting out properties and the activity is carried out systematically to earn profit. (Paras 7, 8, 9, 10)

(C) Principle of Consistency - Revenue cannot change its stance on the classification of income without a change in facts or law. The consistent acceptance of rental income as business income in earlier assessment years is a strong factor in favor of the assessee. (Para 12)

Facts of the case:
The assessee, Ambuja Neotia Hotel Ventures Ltd., a company incorporated in 1988, is engaged in real estate development and sale/lease of properties. It acquired commercial spaces in City Centre, Salt Lake, Kolkata, which it let out to various tenants, charging license fees and utility charges. The assessee treated the rental income as business income, consistent with its main objects and past practice. The Assessing Officer (AO) assessed it as 'Income from House Property', which was upheld by the CIT(A).

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal held that the rental income was assessable under 'Business Income', considering the main objects of the MOA, the systematic letting out of properties as a business activity, and the principle of consistency.

Issues: The main issue was whether the rental income from letting out commercial properties should be assessed as 'Business Income' or 'Income from House Property'.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal relied on the Supreme Court's decision in Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. and the Calcutta High Court's decision in Shyam Burlap Company Ltd., holding that where the main object of the company is to let out properties and the activity is carried on systematically to earn profit, the rental income constitutes business income. The principle of consistency also favored the assessee as the revenue had accepted the classification in earlier years. Result : Appeal allowed.

Table of Content
1. classification of rental income (Para 1 , 2)
2. facts and lower authorities' decision (Para 3 , 4)
3. arguments of parties (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. analysis and decision on classification of income (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13)
5. disallowance of expenses and final decision (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)

ORDER / आदेश

Per Rajesh Kumar, AM:

The present appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 21.11.2025 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. CIT(A)'] u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') which is in connection with the assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 20.04.2021 for Assessment Year 2018-19.

2. The issue raised in Ground No. 1 of the appeal is whether the rental income earned by the assessee deserves to be assessed under the head ‘Profits & Gains from Business’ instead of ‘Income from House Property’ as assessed by the AO.

3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee had filed its return of income on 30.10.2018 for A.Y. 2018-19 declaring income of Rs.NIL. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny by issue of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 22.09.2019. During the course of assessment proceedings, the ld. AO noted that, though an amount of Rs.16,93,24,009/- was credited to the P&L Account on account of rental income under the head ‘Revenue from Operation’ but no income was disclosed under the head ‘House Property’. The ld. AO vide notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 29.12.2020 required the assessee to furnish complete factual details relating to the rental receipts reflected in Form 26AS. The assessee furnished its reply dated 07.01.2021 wherein it was submitted that, the asseessee company was formed in the year 1988 and since then, it has been engaged in the business of real estate development and sale/ lease of real estate properties. As part of its real estate business, the appellant had acquired commercial properties in a shopping complex named City Centre, Salt Lake for commercial exploitation. It was also submitted that since F.Y. 2004-05, the assessee has been letting out these commercial properties and has derived rental income in the form of license fees and utility charges. The assessee further submitted that, the lease rental income was offered to tax under the head business & profession as leasing of property was one of the main objects of the company and that the nature & character of commercial spaces owned by the assessee was in the nature of business assets/stock in trade. It was also brought to notice of the ld. AO that the assessee has been consistently offering such rental receipts from properties under the head ‘Profits & Gains from Business’ since FY 2004-05. In support of the submission, the assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd (373 ITR 673), Karanpura Development Co. Ltd. (44 ITR 362) and Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Shyam Burlap Company Ltd (61 taxmann.com 121). However the ld. AO was not agreeable to the explanation offered by the assessee. According to him, merely because there is an entry in the object clause of the business in Memorandum of Association showing a particular object would not be the determinative factor to arrive at a conclusion that the rental income is to be treated as income from business. He further observed that, the leasing activity was not the principal business activity of the assessee and that the assessee had other business segments as well and therefore in his view, rental receipts were assessable under the head ‘house property’. The ld. AO further was of the view that, the separate agreements entered between the assessee and the lessees in respect of rental receipts and utilities charges was a mechanism and smokescreen to classify the entire receipts as business receipts instead of income chargeable under the head ‘house pr

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top