Aurum Platz P. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2023)105 ITR 615 / 225 TTJ 771 / 152 taxmann.com 85 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 45 : Capital gains-Business income-Sale of flats-Intention to hold the same as investment-Income chargeable to tax as capital gains and not business income-Unsold flat generating rental income cannot be treated as stock-in-trade-Res Judicata-No material changes in facts and law-Revenue is not permitted to take different view in subsequent years. [S. 28(i)]

Held that  both the main objects clause as well as the other objects clause of the memorandum of association of the assessee-company contained provisions to enable the assessee to let out the apartments on hire which established the intention of the assessee to hold the properties as investment and not as stock-in-trade. Even after altering the memorandum of association, the assessee continued to hold the apartments for a period of approximately 3.5 years before making first sale. The project was spread over 13 years from the date of acquisition, which was unusual in the case of business. The conduct of the assessee was more to earn lease rent from the property and not to exploit these properties as business assets. Income chargeable to tax as capital gains and not business income. Unsold flat generating rental income cannot be   treated as stock-in-trade-Res Judicata. No material changes in facts and law. Revenue is not permitted to take different view in subsequent years. Ashok Kumar Jalan v. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 316 (Bom)(HC),  applied.   (AY. 2015-16 to 2018-19)