9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1146X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to and relied upon by the ld.AR in the case of Informed Technologies India Ltd (2017 (2) TMI 744 - ITAT MUMBAI). Tribunal direct the AO to delete the addition in respect of Otters flat No.2B by sustaining the addition in respect of second flat viz Peace Heaven. Accordingly, the ground taken by the assessee is partly allowed. Disallowance being 10% out of vehicle-telephone expenses - Held that:- We find that the ld.CIT(A) has passed a very reasoned order by upholding the disallowance at 10% of the total expenses on the basis of the decision in assessee’s own case in the assessment year 2006-07(supra). Since, the assessee has not furnished any details of expenses during the course of assessment proceedings before the AO or the CIT(A) an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... operty by taking rent 8% of the total investment thereby calculating the income from property at ₹ 2,14,665/-. The details of investments in the said properties were ₹ 35,69,278/- and ₹ 2,64,018/- respectively aggregating to ₹ 38,33,296/-. In the appellate proceedings, the ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeals of the assessee by observing and holding as under : 5.3 I have considered the facts of the case, the assessment order and the submissions made by the appellant. The fact that the appellant was owner of the properties is not in dispute. The flats were vacant. The question to be considered is whether the annual value of the flats which was vacant throughout the previous year is chargeable to tax or is to be take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e invoked. In respect the flat at Peace heaven, the assessee contended that the same could be assessed and brought to tax by resorting the provisions of section 23(1)( c) of the Act. The ld. AR, in defence of his argument relied on the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Informed Technologies India Ltd V/s DCIT (2016) 75 taxmann.com 128 (Mum-Trib) and Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd V/s ACIT (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum). The ld. AR prayed that in view of the ratio laid down by the Tribunal in these two cases, the addition made by the AO in respect Otters flat No.2-B deserved to be deleted. 6. On the other hand, the ld.DR supported the orders of authorities below. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the aforesaid term 'Property is let' in section 23(1)(c), cannot be substituted by the term 'house is actually let' as used by the legislature in all its wisdom in sub-section (3) of section 23. Thus it can safely be concluded that the requirement 'house is actually let' during the year is not a prerequisite for bringing the case of an assessee within the sweep of section 23(1)(c), as long as the property is let in the earlier period and is found vacant for the whole year under consideration, subject to the condition that such vacancy of the property is not for self occupation of the same by the assessee, who continues to hold the said property for the purpose of letting out. The usage of the term 'Propert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to delete the addition in respect of Otters flat No.2B by sustaining the addition in respect of second flat viz Peace Heaven. Accordingly, the ground taken by the assessee is partly allowed. 8. The issue raised by the assessee in the grounds of appeal no.5 is with regard to upholding the disallowance of ₹ 41,179/- being 10% out of vehicle-telephone expenses. 9. The AO during the course of assessment proceedings observed that the assessee has charged to the profit and loss account an amount of ₹ 2,50,428/- and ₹ 1,61,361/- towards vehicle expenses and telephone expenses respectively. The AO called for the details of these expenses during the course of assessment proceedings, when the assessee failed to furnish the det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
