9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (11) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... market rent if it had been let out in the vicinity. The Assessing Officer had not taken note of the two aspects. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer to pass fresh order of assessment keeping in view the standard rent to be fixed under the 1960 Act and also the market value at Rs. 3 per square foot as pleaded by the assessee in respect of a building let out by the corporation. - 506/04 - - - Dated:- 24-11-2009 - MANJUNATH K. L. and ARAVIND KUMAR JJ. K.V. Aravind for M.V. Seshachala for the appellant. S. Parthsarathi for the respondent. Judgment: K. L. Manjunath J . -The Revenue has come up in this appeal challenging the legality and correctness of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdingly the order of assessment was passed. Similarly the assessee also claimed the deduction under section 24(1)(ix) of the Act which was rejected by the Assessing Officer by his order dated January 25, 2001. 4. Aggrieved by the order of assessment the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Bangalore who allowed the appeal in part by his order dated January 31, 2002. Being not satisfied with the relief granted to the assessee by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Bangalore, the assessee filed further appeal to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. The Tribunal after hearing the parties allowed the appeal in part holding that the income offered by the assessee at Rs. 2.25 sq. ft. per month ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pting the contention of the assessee. Alternatively he contends the Tribunal has failed to consider that alternative ground urged by the assessee that the assessment could have been passed based on the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960. Therefore he contends that the order of the Tribunal has to be set aside and the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has to be restored. 7. Per contra Sri Parthasarathi, learned counsel for the assessee submits that no substantial question arises in this appeal since the Assessing Officer was required to pass an order of assessment based on section 23 of the Income-tax Act. According to him considering the nature of the building and the location where the building ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e rent, he has to offer the building for tax. When the building is not occupied it was for the Assessing Officer or for the assessee to prove what would be the standard rent to be fixed under the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, and when the assessee contends that the adjoining building has been let out by the corporation at the rate of Rs. 3 per sq. ft. as pleaded by the assessee, it was for the Assessing Officer to find out what would be the standard rent under the Tamilnadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1960, and what would be the probable market rent if it would have been let out in the vicinity. But unfortunately this has not been taken into consideration even though the same has been pleaded and urged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
