JUDGMENT
K. Raviraja Pandian, J.
1. These appeals are filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ‘A’ Bench, Chennai dated 22.06.2007 in ITA Nos. 2021, 2022, 2051 and 2052/Mds/2005 for the Assessment Years 2000-2001 and 2001-2001 respectively.
2. The common question of law formulated for entertainment of these appeals are as follows:
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the amenity charges received in respect of let out property should be treated as income from other sources?.
3. The appeals relate to the assessment years 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. The assessee is a company. In respect of the relevant assessment years, the assessee treated the amenity charges received from the properties owned by the assessee as income from business. The Assessing Officer, treated the entire amount as income from house property. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), who upheld the order of assessment to the extent that he treated the income from rent as income from house property but held the amenity charges as income from other sources. Both revenue and the assessee filed appeals to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The revenue filed an appeal contending that the amenity charges should also be treated as income from house property, while the assessee filed an appeal contending that the amenity charges should be treated as income from business. The Tribunal upheld the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) on this issue and held that the amenity charges should be treated as income from other sources. The correctness of the said order is now canvassed by filing these appeals by the revenue.
4. We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the revenue, who fairly submitted that the issue is covered in the decision of Tarapore & Co. v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 259 ITR 389 against the revenue in which this Court held as follows:
the actual rent received by the assessee would constitute the basis for determining the annual value and it was that value which would have to form the basis for determining income from house property and for allowing deduction from income from house property to the extent permitted under the other provisions of the Income Tax Act. In making such computation, there was no provision to add other amounts received by the owner of the building is representing the value of the service charges rendered by him to his tenants as income from house property. Hence the Tribunal was right in holding that the receipts from service charges were liable to be assessed as income from other sources and not income from house property.
5. Following the same, these appeals are dismissed. No costs. No costs. Consequently, the connected M.P. Nos. 1 of 2008 are also dismissed.