Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2013 (3) TMI 197

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssessing Officer, so as to enable him to come to a conclusion as to whether the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, applies to the facts of the case. Having said so, we also observe that the Assessing Officer has not examine the previous records of the assessee to determine as to whether the rental payments were, as claimed by the assessee, was offered on the same basis, as was done this year. - Reassessment proceeding justified. - Against assessee. Since the assessee has not furnished the information sought by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals) has failed to examine as to whether the Maharashtra Rent Control Act applies to the case or not, we are of the considered opinion that the issue is required to be restored to th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ome, showed rent received from office and shops in North Stand and use of Stadium at Rs. 8,24,958, for the assessment year 2002-03. The Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act, dated 30th March 2007, re-opening the assessments on the basis that the rent offered to tax in respect of office and shops located in the North Stand appeared to be much lower than the fair rent resulting in understatement of income. The Assessing Officer recorded that the assessee paid water charges of Rs. 2,66,120, and also paid municipal taxes as against rent received of Rs. 2,15,910, resulting in a loss of Rs. 5,20,053, which resulted in income escaping assessment. 4. The Assessing Officer requested the assessee to file the following docu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 0,00,000. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the re-opening. On the estimation of ALV, he came to a conclusion that the Assessing Officer has estimated the annual rent in an arbitrary manner. He held that the Assessing Officer does not have evidence to suggest that the assessee has actually received something more than what it has disclosed. He gave a finding that the property concerned is governed by Maharashtra Rent Control Act, and that the assessee cannot raise rent of its own. He deleted the addition for both the assessment years. Aggrieved, the Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The common ground raised by the Revenue, except variation in figures, is whether or not the Commissioner (Appeals) was justified in deleting the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d-in-law. He submitted that the re-opening is made on mere suspicion. On merit, learned Counsel defended the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and submitted that Rent Control Act, applies to the assessee company and the tenants are protected tenants. He submitted that the assessee company has received rental income of Rs. 1,78,275, from letting out of offices and shops located in North Stand and subsequent to the enactment of Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, w.e.f. 31st March 2000, the rent was increased to 5% and offered to tax. He submitted that for all the assessment years, the rent was accepted and no addition made. He prayed for relief. 12. Rival contentions heard. On a careful consideration of the facts and circumstances .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... opinion, ought to have furnished the information sought by the Assessing Officer, so as to enable him to come to a conclusion as to whether the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, applies to the facts of the case. Having said so, we also observe that the Assessing Officer has not examine the previous records of the assessee to determine as to whether the rental payments were, as claimed by the assessee, was offered on the same basis, as was done this year. We also find that the Assessing Officer has no basis for estimating the annual rent at Rs. 35,00,000, for assessment year 2005-06 and Rs. 50,00,000, for assessment year 2002-03. Since the assessee has not furnished the information sought by the Assessing Officer and the Commissioner (App .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates