Allowing the appeal of the revenue the Court held that the amount received as advance of rent by the assessee and which remained unclaimed with it could not be treated as unexplained investment or unexplained cash credit, since it was neither, and assessment had to be upheld as an income from business. The source was clear from the books of account and there was proper explanation for the amounts. If the company which had paid the advance rent had occupied the premises the amounts would have been shown as income from business. The assessment itself was finalised after three years, which was the normal period of limitation for recovery of money, even if calculated from the date on which last refund was made. The assessee had not produced any agreement which would have had a restrictive clause for forfeiture of the advance amounts, if the contract did not fructify. The assessment order itself was passed after three years from the date of commencement of limitation and there was no claim made by the assessee as to any recovery proceedings having been commenced by the other company or a repayment having been made. The order of the Assessing Officer was restored with modification to assess the rent received in advance as income in the relevant previous year.( AY. 2003 -04)
CIT v. Amritha Cyber Park (P.) Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 199/ 263 Taxman 546 / 180 DTR 285(Ker.)(HC)
S. 69 : Unexplained investments–Advance of rent received for premises-Unclaimed balance cannot be treated as unexplained investment or cash credits–Assessable as business income of the relevant assessment year. [S. 5, 28(i), 68]