Park View Enterprises vs State Government Of Tamil Nadu on 18 October, 1989
(i) Park View Enterprises Vs State Govt. of Tamil Nadu [1991]
189 ITR 192.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.48 seconds)M/S.Cyber Pearl Information ... vs Income Tax Officer on 27 February, 2017
"CYBER PEARL INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PARK P. LTD V.
INCOME TAX OFFICER- (2017) 399 ITR 310(Mad)
Hon'ble Madras High Court held that the consistent view of the
courts has been that wherever, in such like sections, the
expression "derived" is used, as against "attributable to", the
width and the amplitude is narrower. Therefore, courts have
held consistently that in order to come to a conclusion as to
whether such pro fits or gains, i.e., income, would be
amenable to deduction, the effective source of such income is
to be looked at. Once, it is found that the income is derived
from a secondary source, which is not the effective source, it
falls outside the purview of such like provisions, which provide
for deductions with purpose of giving fillip to the designated
activity, which, in the instant case, is the business of
developing a Special Economic Zone.
Chennai Properties And Investment Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 March, 1998
"184. Further, Ld. DR has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd.
vs. CIT in Civil Appeal No.4494/2004 wherein Hon'ble Supreme
Court has held that letting out of the properties is in fact the business
of the assessee. We have gone through the decision of Hon'ble
Supreme Court and we are of the view that this decision favours the
argument of the assessee. At page 4 of the decision, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has considered the judgement of that court in East
India Housing and Land Trust Ltd. The court has considered that
decision that where the main objection the company is buying and
developing land and properties and promoting and developing
markets and some rent is turned out of that, the character of that
income shall be income from house property. Therefore, in this case
too, the assessee company is a developer and hence, the decision of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties is rendered
in the context of the company which is formed with the main object of
renting up of the properties. In view of the above, respectfully
following the decision of coordinate Bench of the ITAT in the case of
assessee for AY 2005-06, we confirm the order of CIT(A) in taxing the
rental income as income from house property. In the result the
ground no.17 of the revenue's appeal is dismissed."
1