Tribunal held that assessee’s main object as stated in its Memorandum of Association was to acquire on license or by purchase, lease, exchange, hire or otherwise lands and property of any tenure, or premises in any part of India and to license or sub-license or lease or sub-lease or let, such lands or property or premises or any part thereof, clearly spells out that the assessee’s main business is to carry out systematic and regular activity in the nature of business of letting out property. S. 27(iiib) read with S.269UA(f) of the Act is not applicable in the instant case as the agreement is only for use of property and not for the transfer of the same. Since the company is neither the owner nor the deemed owner in terms of S. 27(iiib), the ‘Contribution from Shops’ cannot be assessed under the head ‘Income from house property’. Tribunal relied on the decisions in case of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd v. CIT  (2015) 373 ITR 673) (SC), Rayala Corpn. (P.) Ltd v. ACIT ( 2016) 386 ITR 500)(SC) and Bombay Plaza (P.) Ltd(2016) 161 ITD 552 (Kol)and upheld the assessee’s claim that the income from granting premises on sub-license was to be assessed under the head income from business.