TAXAP/124/2002 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 124 of 2002 WITH TAX APPEAL No. 125 of 2002 TAX APPEAL No. 126 of 2002 TAX APPEAL No. 127 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ Sd/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.H.SHUKLA Sd/- ==================================== 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? YES 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? NO 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ==================================== HARIKRISHNA FAMILY TRUST - Appellant Versus A.C.I.T. - Opponent ==================================== TAXAP/124/2002 2/5 JUDGMENT Appearance : 1. Tax Appeal No. 124 of 2002 MR JP SHAH for Appellant. MR MANISH R BHATT for Opponent. 2. Tax Appeal No. 125 of 2002 MR JP SHAH for Appellant. MRS MAUNA M. BHATT for Opponent. 3. Tax Appeal No. 126 of 2002 MR JP SHAH for Appellant. MR B B NAIK for Opponent. 4. Tax Appeal No. 127 of 2002 MR JP SHAH for Appellant. MR MANISH R BHATT for Opponent. ==================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.H.SHUKLA Date : 21/07/2008 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ) 1. Tax Appeal No. 124 of 2002 and Tax Appeal No.125 of 2002 are not listed for final hearing on today's Board. However, questions involved in all the four tax appeals are identical and they are in respect of the same assessee, the papers are called for and they are being disposed of by this common judgment. Even the TAXAP/124/2002 3/5 JUDGMENT parties have no objection in calling for the papers and deciding together. 2. All the four tax appeals are filed by the assessee and assessment years involved are 1988 – 89, 1990 – 91, 1991 – 92 and 1992 – 93. All the four appeals were admitted by this Court on 14.03.2002 and following substantial questions of law were formulated for the determination and consideration of this Court :- I. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the rental income earned by the assessee trust was "Income from Business" and not "Income from House Property" or "Income from other sources" ? II. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the rental income from the hire of the building is taxable as "Income from other sources" or "Income from House Property" or "Income from Business" ? III.Whether, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee was doing business on the facts of the case ?” 3. In the appeal memo of all the four appeals, the appellant – assessee has pointed out that in its own case for earlier years, the above referred questions were formulated in I.T.R. No. 20 of 1997 for the assessment years 1986 – 87, 1987 – 88 and 1989 – 90. I.T.R. No. 20 of 1997 is heard and disposed of by this TAXAP/124/2002 4/5 JUDGMENT Court on 25.02.2008. The said judgment is reported at (2008) 216 CTR Reports 331. While disposing the said reference, this Court has held that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the assessee was doing business. In the facts of the case, the income is liable to be taxed as income from other sources and not as income from house property or income from business. The Court, therefore, answered all the three questions referred to for the opinion of this Court accordingly i.e. partly in favour of the assessee and partly in favour of the revenue. Since the issue involved in all the four tax appeals is similar one and questions were also identical in nature, we decide all these four appeals partly in favour of the assessee and partly in favour of the revenue. We accordingly hold that the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the assessee was doing business. In the facts of the case, the income is liable to be taxed as income from other sources and not as income from house property or income from business. 4. All the four appeals are accordingly disposed of and TAXAP/124/2002 5/5 JUDGMENT they are partly allowed without any order as to costs. 5. Office is directed to place copy of this order in each connected appeals. Sd/- Sd/- [K. A. PUJ, J.] [R.H. SHUKLA, J.] Savariya