9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax in the instant year – Decided against the Revenue. - ITA No. 708 & 709/Chd/2013 - - - Dated:- 20-9-2013 - Shri T. R. Sood, A. M And Ms. Sushma Chowla, JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Amar Veer Singh For the Respondent : Shri Munish Khullar ORDER Per T. R. Sood, A.M. These appeals are directed against the order dated 25.3.2013 of the ld. CIT(A), Chandigarh. These were heard together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 708/Chd/2013 2 In this appeal the revenue has raised the following grounds: "1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 4,61 crores made for non-making of provision of interes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the rival submissions we find that identical issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal in Assessment year 2007-08 in ITA No. 1183/Chd/2011 and the same was decided vide para 8 9 which read as under: 3 "8 After hearing the Ld. representatives of both the parties, we find that both the issues raised vide ground Nos. 1 2 of the appeal are covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of this Bench of eh Tribunal dated 30.6.2010 passed in assessee's case in ITA No. 875/Chd/2009 relating to Assessment year 2006-07. In that year, a sum of Rs. 1,71,20,58,413/- was outstanding from the Punjab Government whereas Rs. 6,25,87,18,142/- was recoverable from FCI. The Assessing Officer disallowed notional i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... account of impugned debits. Hence, in this background, we hereby affirm the order of the CIT(Appeals). Thus, Ground Nos. 3 4 raised are dismissed." Facts in the present case are identical, therefore, following the above we decide these issues against the revenue. ITA No. 709/Chd/2013 9 In this appeal the revenue has raised the following grounds: "1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs. 5,65 crores made for non-making of provision of interest for the year on losses incurred by the Corporation to the tune of Rs. 54.88 crores on the basis of director's report. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come- tax irrespective of the fact that rent has been received in the year or not. According to him annual value was of Rs. 8,25,300/- was chargeable after giving deduction of 30%. 12 On appeal addition was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) on the basis of order of the Tribunal for Assessment year 2004-05 in ITA No. 561/Chd/2007. 13 Before us, the ld. DR for the revenue supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 14 On the other hand, the ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that the issue is covered against the Revenue by the order of the Tribunal for Assessment year 2004-05 in ITA No. 561/Chd/2007. 15 After considering the rival submissions we find that identical issue came up for consideration of the Tribunal in Assessment year 2004-0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. It is also not in dispute that the amount has not been actually received by the assessee, The provisions of Section 25AA read as under: 25AA. Where the assessee cannot realize rent from a property let to a tenant and subsequently the assessee has realized any amount in respect of such rent, the amount so realized shall be deemed to be income chargeable under the head "Income from house property " and accordingly charged to income-tax as the income of that previous year in which such rent is realized whether or not the assessee is the owner of that property in that previous year. Which clearly operate in the present case. A per usal of the aforesaid Sect ion provides complete answer to the objection of the Assessing Officer. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
