9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1365X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 - - - Dated:- 20-12-2013 - Shri P. M. Jagtap And Dr. S. T. M. Pavalan,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Prakash K. Jotwani For the Respondent : Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye ORDER Per P.M. Jagtap, AM These two appeals filed by the assessee against two separate orders of Ld. CIT-(A)-4, Mumbai dated 20/1/2012 for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09, involve common issues and the same, therefore, have been heard together and are being disposed off by a single consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of investment and finance brokerage. During the years under consideration, it had let out a house property at Nariman Point, Mumbai, to M/s Bank ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... municipal valuation, the same should be taken in to consideration for determining the ALV of the property. He held that ALV of the property could be determined at a rent which it could fetch in the open market or a similar property could fetch under the similar situation. In this regard he noted that the assessee company itself has rented the same property in the subsequent years vide agreement dated 31.3.2008 for a rent of Rs. 1,00,000/- per month. Taking the said rent as basis and allowing a reduction of 10%, he determined the ALV of the assessee for the years under consideration at Rs. 90,000/- per month i.e. at Rs. 10,80,000/- and directed the AO to adopt the same as ALV of the assessee's property subject to further deduction on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal held that this is how the Board sought to interpret the expression "the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year" used in section 23(1)(a). The same proposition is supported by various decisions of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. 5.2 As regards the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba (supra) relied on by the Ld.AR, it is relevant to state that the issue raised before the High court pertains to the validity of determining the ALV by adding notional interest on the interest free deposit, which the Court has held as not permissible. In this context, the High Court in the said decision has observed that the annual value fixed by the Municipal Authorities can ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t claimed by the assessee, in our view, the question of assessment by resorting to fair market value by ignoring the rateable value does not arise. Having noted that the actual rent declared by the assessee (Rs.30,000/- per month) is more or less ten times higher than the rateable value fixed by the municipal authorities (Rs.3,298/- per month) for which we do not find reasons to disbelieve the actual rent claimed/declared by the assessee and hence it is not warranted on the part of the AO to determine the income by taking the fair market rent of comparable properties let out in the localities by ignoring the rateable value fixed by the municipal authorities for arriving at the ALV. In view of the aforementioned discussion, we do not find an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
