PER BHAGCHAND, AM The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Jaipur dated 19-04-2016 for the assessment year 2006-07.

2.1 The Ground No. 1 of the assessee is regarding confirming the initiation of proceedings u/s 147 of the Act by the AO which has been rejected by the ld. CIT(A) taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case including the written submission of the ITA No. 694/JP/2016 M/s. Sendra Marble Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2), Jaipur . 2 assessee. I find no merit in the arguments advanced by the ld. AR of the assessee at the time of hearing before the Bench. Hence, the same is dismissed.

3.1 In the ground nos. 2 and 3 of appeal, the issue raised by the assessee is regarding treating the lease / rental income as income from house property as against business income declared by the assessee and not allowing the business expenditure.

3.2 At the outset of the hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee prayed that this issue is covered by the order of this ITAT, Jaipur Bench vide its order dated 20-06-2016 in ITA No. 333/JP/2013 & 549/JP/2014 for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09.

3.3 The ld. DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities.

3.4 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. I find merit in the prayer of the assessee that this issue has already been decided by this Bench in favour of the assessee vide its order dated 02-06-2016 by observing as under:- 3.6 I have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The issue involved in both the appeal is relating to rental income/ lease income received by the assessee. The assessee has declared the income as income from business and the AO has treated the same as income from house property relying on the judgemnet of Honble Chennai High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd., 266 ITR 685. The ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the AO. It is observed that ITA No. 694/JP/2016 M/s. Sendra Marble Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2), Jaipur . 3 judgemnet of Honble Chennai High Court in the case of CIT vs. Chennai Properties and Investment Ltd. (supra) has been reversed by the Honble Supreme Court vide its order dated 09-04-2015 while deciding the Civil Appeal No. 4494 of 2004 in the case of M/s. Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. vs. CIT, Central-III, Tamil Nadu wherein the Honble Court held as under:- We are conscious of the aforesaid dicta laid down in the constitution Bench judgement. It is for this reason, we have, at the beginning of this judgment, stated the circumstances of the present case from which we arrive at irresistible conclusion that in this case, letting of the properties is in fact is the business of the assessee. The assessee therefore, rightly disclosed the income under the head Income from Business. It cannot be treated as Income from the house property. We, accordingly, allow this appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore that of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. No orders as to costs. Civil Appeal Nos. 4491-4493 of 2004 The appeals are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order in Civil Appeal No. 4494 of 2004.

3.7 The ld. AR of the assessee has also drawn our attention towards Memorandum and Article of Association of the assessee company wherein the main objects to be pursued by the assessee company were to hold, purchase, acquire, to take on lease or in any other lawful manner any area, land, buildings, structures and to sell or deal with or build, develop, maintain and to act as agents, promoters, mangers and developers of real estate, land and building and also to let or dispose off the same on instalment basis, rent- purchase basis. In view of these facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that the facts of the assessee case are similar to the facts decided by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Chennai Properties and Investments Ltd. vs. CIT-III, Tamil Nadu (supra). Hence, respectfully following the same I allow both the appeals of the assessee.

4.0 In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. ITA No. 694/JP/2016 M/s. Sendra Marble Co. (P) Ltd. vs. ITO, Ward- 2(2), Jaipur . 4 It is also noted that the facts involved in the present appeal i.e. assessment year 2006-07 are similar to the appeals of the assessee for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09 (supra). Hence, respectfully following the ITAT order dated 02-06-2016 of this Bench in assessees own case for the assessment year 2007-08 and 2008-09 (supra), I allow this ground of appeal of the assessee.

4.1 The Ground No. 4 of the assessee is regarding charging of interest of u/s 234A and 234B of the Act which is mandatory and consequential in nature.

5.0 In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19 /10/2016. Sd/- HkkxpUn (Bhagchand) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 19 /10/ 2016 *Mishra vknsk dh izfrfyfi vxzsf"kr@Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- M/s. Sendra Marble Co. (P) Ltd., Jaipur

2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- The ITO, Ward- 2 (2), Jaipur

3. vk;dj vk;qDrvihy@ CIT(A).

4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT,

5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur

6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 694/JP/2016) vknskkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@ Assistant. Registrar