IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME INCOME INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.949 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.949 OF 2007 TAX APPEAL NO.949 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax 5, Mumbai .. Appellant Vs. M/s Akul Investments Ltd ... Respondent Mr.R.Asokan for Appellant None for Respondent CORAM CORAM CORAM : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and : Dr.S.Radhakrishnan and A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, A.V.Nirgude, JJ JJ JJ DATE DATE DATE : 17th July, 2008 : 17th July, 2008 : 17th July, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondent though served. In the above appeal, the appellant is seeking to raise the following questions of law: The substantial question of law arising in the present appeal is regarding the true scope and correct interpretation of section 23 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and other provisions and whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in holding that the income of the assessee has to be bifurcated between the income from house property and business income without appreciating the fact that the entire income of the assessee has to be assessed under the head income from house property ? Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Tribunal is right in holding that income from house property has to be worked out on the basis of municipal rateable value instead of 2 comparable market rent method adopted by the Assessing Officer ? 2. We have perused the judgment of the tribunal dated 17.10.2006. Especially for the reasons stated in paragraph 13 of the said judgment, it is very clear that the assessee was not letting out the entire property. What is being done is that the assessee is running a business centre wherein various services are provided by the assessee to various clients which is totally different from letting out the entire property and as such the the tribunal has rightly held that the entire amount could not be construed as income from house property. Under these circumstances, as it is only a finding of fact, we find no substance in the above questions of law. The appeal is devoid of merits. The same stands dismissed. { A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } A.V.Nirgude, J } { Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J } Dr.S.Radhakrishnan, J }