Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 5 of 5 (0.23 seconds)Section 250 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 24 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Radhasoami Satsang, Saomi Bagh,Agra vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 November, 1991
"We note that it is a well settled legal position that factual matters which
permeate through more than one assessment year, if the Revenue has
accepted a particular's view or proposition in the past, it is not open for the
Revenue to take an entirely contrary or different stand in a later year on the
same issue, involving identical facts unless and until a cogent case is made
out by the Assessing Officer on the basis of change in facts. For that we rely
on the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT
193 ITR 321 (SC), wherein it was held as follows:
Chennai Properties And Investment Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 March, 1998
15. During the hearing before the ITAT, the ld. A/R pointed out the order
of the Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case related to allowable expenses
for supervision charge and repair charge and partners' interest. During
hearing the assessee prayed for acceptance of additional ground and treating
the entire income as the business income by covering the order of Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. vs.
CIT reported in [2015] 373 ITR 673 (SC). With the consent of the ld. D/R
we accepted the assessee's prayer, so the additional ground of the assessee is
accepted. Respectfully following the order of Hon'ble Apex Court, the entire
revenue income is converted to business income. The issue was agitated first
time before the Bench not even the appellate and assessing authorities. The
calculation in relation to the change of nature of income from house property
to business income is duly under consideration of the ld. assessing authority.
1