New Breach Candy Co Op Hsg Society Ltd, ... vs Department Of Income Tax
- CitationI.T.A. No.6490/Mum/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The receipts a housing co-operative society collects from its members on transfer of flats, including voluntary contributions, are not taxable as income of the society where such receipts are covered by the principle of mutuality, as held by the jurisdictional High Court in Sind Co-operative Housing Society and applied in the assessee's own earlier years and in Darbhanga Mansion CHS Ltd; the Tribunal follows that binding decision and declines to sustain the addition on that footing. Non-occupancy charges received by a co-operative housing society from a member are likewise not taxable as income of the society where, following the same line of authority applied to the identical receipt in the earlier assessment year, they are treated as within the principle of mutuality; the addition is accordingly not sustained.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई यायपीठ "डी " मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL" D" BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN (AM) AND AMIT SHUKLA, (JM) सव ी बी.आर.बा करन, लेखा सद य एवं अ मत शु ला, या यक सद य के सम
आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.6490/Mum/2013 ( नधारण वष / Assessment Year :2010-11)
Income Tax Officer, 16(2)(1), बनाम/ New Breach Candy Co-op Hsg Room No.221, Vs. Society Ltd, Matru Mandir, 70-C, Tardeo Road, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Mumbai-400007 Mumbai-400026 (अपीलाथ /Appellant) .. ( यथ / Respondent)
थायी ले ख ा सं . /जीआइआर सं . /PAN/GIR No. :AAAAN0005D
अपीलाथ ओर से / Appellant by Shri Akhilendra P Yadav यथ क ओर से/Respondent by Shri Rahul K Hakani
सुनवाई क तार ख / Date of Hearing : 25.3.2015 घोषणा क तार ख /Date of Pronouncement : 25.3.2015
आदे श / O R D E R
PER B.R. BASKARAN (AM)
The appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 23.8.2013 passed by Ld.CIT(A)-27, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2010-11
2. The Revenue is assailing the order of ld.CIT(A) in respect of
following issues :
a) Deleting the addition relating to transfer charges;
b) Deleting the addition relating to non-occupancy charges.
2 I . T . A . N o . 6 4 9 0 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3
3. We have heard the parties and perused the record. The assessee is
a Co-operative Housing Society. The AO noticed that the assessee has
received transfer fee and also voluntary contribution from the transferees
of flats, which aggregated to Rs.31 lakhs. Out of the above said amount,
the assessee had refunded the amount of Rs.50,000/- to one of the Flat
owners and credited the balance amount of Rs.30,50,000/- to the
"Common amenities fund account. The AO took the view that as per Bye-
Law of the Co-operative Housing Society, the Co-operative Housing Society
can charge an amount of Rs.25,000/-"only as transfer fee. The AO further
noticed that in the assessment year 2009-10 also, the voluntary
contribution received from the transferees was assessed to income tax.
Even though the assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay
High Court in the case of Sind Co-operative Housing Society V/s ITO 317
ITR 47 (Bom), the AO refused to follow the same on the reasoning that
the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court was not accepted by the
department and the matter is sub-judice. Accordingly, the AO assessed the
amount of Rs.30,50,000/- as income of the assessee. The AO further
noticed that the assessee has received a sum of Rs.15,001/- as non-
occupancy charges from one of the flat owners. The AO took the view that
the above said receipt is not covered by principle of mutuality and further
in the assessment year 2009-10 an identical receipt was assessed to tax.
3 I . T . A . N o . 6 4 9 0 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3
Accordingly, he assessed the amount of Rs.15,001/- also as income of the
assessee.
4. In the appeal filed by the assessee before the First Appellate
Authority, the First Appellate Authority has deleted both the additions by
following the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court
rendered in the case of Sind Co-operative Housing Society(supra) and the
decision in the case of Mittal Court Premises Co-op. Society Ld. V/s ITO
(2009) 184 Taxman 292 (Bom). Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A),
the Revenue has filed this appeal before us.
5. Before us, the ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that
an identical additions have been made by the AO in the assessment year
2009-10 and the both the additions were deleted by the ld.CIT(A) in the
appeal filed by the assessee and the order of ld.CIT(A) was confirmed by
the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in its order dated 10.1.2014 passed
in the assessee's own case in ITA No.6685/Mum/2012 (AY-2009-10). The
ld. Counsel further submitted that the voluntary contribution received by
the assessee was also subject matter of addition in the assessment years
2004-05 and 2005-06 and the Tribunal had deleted the addition, vide its
order dated 9.10.2009 passed in assessee's own case in ITA
No.4713/Mum/2007 and ITA No.873/Mum/2008 by following the decision
of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sind Co-operative Housing 4 I . T . A . N o . 6 4 9 0 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3
Society(supra). The said order of the Tribunal has since been approved by
the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court vide its order dated 6.7.2011 passed
in Income Tax Appeal No.3345 of 2010.
6. The ld. DR did not controvert the factual aspect presented by the ld.
AR.
7. The foregoing discussions would show that the identical additions
have been made in the earlier assessment years and the same has been
deleted by the Tribunal and the order of the Tribunal was confirmed by the
Hon'ble Bombay high Court also by following the decision rendered by it in
the case of Sind Co-operative Housing Society(supra). The Hon'ble
jurisdictional High Court has also in its decision dated 18-12-2014 rendered
in the case of CIT Vs. Darbhanga Mansion CHS Ltd in ITA No.1474 of 2012
has held that the voluntary contributions are also covered by the principle
of mutuality. Further, we notice that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the
decision rendered by the Jurisdictional High Court. Under these
circumstances, we do not find any necessity to interfere with the order
passed by the ld CIT(A) on both issues.
5 I . T . A . N o . 6 4 9 0 / Mu m / 2 0 1 3
8. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.
The above order was pronounced in the open court on 25th March, 2015.
घोषणा खल ु े यायालय म दनांकः 25th March, 2015 को क गई ।
Sd sd
(अ मत शु ला / AMIT SHUKLA) (बी.आर.बा करन / B.R. BASKARAN) या यक सद य / JUDICIAL MEMBER लेखा सद य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
मुंबई Mumbai: 25th March,2015.
व. न.स./ SRL , Sr. PS
आदे श क त ल प अ े षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant
2. यथ / The Respondent.
3. आयकर आयु त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- concerned
4. आयकर आयु त / CIT concerned
5. वभागीय त न ध, आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai concerned
6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.
आदे शानस ु ार/ BY ORDER, True copy सहायक पंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, मुंबई /ITAT, Mumbai
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free