9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1077X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y the Full Bench of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACIT vs. Moni Kumar Subba [2011 (3) TMI 497 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. Thus, AO is directed to compute the ALV of the vacant flats/shops as per municipal ratable value in terms of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court with this direction the appeal treated as partly allowed. Addition on account of marriage expenditure added u/s 69C - Held that:- AO has simply made an estimate of ₹ 25 lakhs simply on the ground that the assessee comes from affluent family and has big stature. Before the Learned CIT (Appeals) the entire break up and source of expenditure has been given, which has been accepted by him at ₹ 21,71,130/-. Once that is so, then there was no point to presume that marriage expenditure would be ₹ 25 lakhs only and therefore, balance amount should be confirmed. There is no enquiry or material information on record to remotely suggest that marriage expenses shown must have been more. Such a reasoning of lower authorities is devoid of any logic and accordingly, we delete the addition of ₹ 3,28,830/-. Addition towards household expenditure - Held that:- It is seen that the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0/- made by the AO on account of income from house property in respect of following properties:- (a) C-31, Ashok Vihar, Phase II Rs.2,04,000 (b) Vasundhra Cooperative Society, Flat No.38, Sector 9, Rohini Rs.1,44,000 (c) Shop No.467-468 Khari Bouli Rs.1,78,560 (d) Shop No.2, B Block LSC, Ashok Vihar Phase II Rs.2,23,200 (e) Shop No.3B, Block LSC, Ashok Vihar, Phase II Rs.2,23,200 (f) Shop No.404-407, Katra Medgran, Khari Bouli Rs.3,83,904 (g) B-2/22, Phase II, Ashok Vihar Rs.17,00,136 (h) Khasra 73/10/2, Village Mundka Rs.1,18,800 Total Rs.31,75,800 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred both on facts in law in confirming the above addition ignoring the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer accordingly proceeded to compute the annual letting value of the properties, except for the property self occupied by the assessee, however has failed to specify the basis on which he has determined the ALV of the properties. The details of the computation of the properties as done by the AO are as under:- S. No. Address Nature Status Annual Letting Value 1 C-31, Ashok Vihar Phase-11 (1/4th Share) Plot Under Construction 204000 2 Flat No. 388, Vasundra Cooperative Society, Sector 9, Rohini Flat Vacant 144000 3 Shop No. 467-468, Khari Bouli (1/3rd Share) Shop Vacant 178560 4 B Block, LSC, Ashok Vihar Phase- 11 Shop on Rent 223200 5 Shop No. 3, B Block, LSC, Ashok Vihar Phase-II Shop Vacan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ived or receivable is in excess of the sum, the amount so received or receivable. In the present case, we are concerned with the properties which are lying vacant or were under construction or were let out. To arrive at the annual value of the property, one has to examine as to what would be the rent, which it is expected to receive. If the annual rent actually received is more than that, then the said sum shall be treated as income from house property. On the other hand, if it is lesser than the amount at which the property can reasonably be expected to let from year to year, then the amount determined as per cl. (a) shall be the income from house property. Admittedly clause (c) does not apply to the facts of this case as none of the property remained vacant during the whole or any part of the previous year. It is seen that the Assessing Officer has determined the ALV of all the immovable properties other than the property self occupied by the assessee, whether it was under construction or were rented or were lying vacant. He has determined the deemed letting value of the properties in the following manner:- Immovable Property Owned by Assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer should take the actual rent received by the assessee and cannot resort to any determination of ALV on some hypothetical market rate. ALV in such cases has to be taken as per clause (b) of section 23(1). Lastly, with regard to the properties which were vacant, we agree with the contention of the Assessing Officer that ALV should have been shown in the terms of section 23(1)(a). However, if the properties were lying vacant and there is no material brought on record by the Assessing Officer for determining the fair market rent, then AO can take municipal ratable value of lease flats/shops for the purpose of determining the ALV. This principle has been upheld by the Full Bench of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACIT vs. Moni Kumar Subba reported in 333 ITR 38. Thus, the ld. Assessing Officer is directed to compute the ALV of the vacant flats/shops as per municipal ratable value in terms of ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court with this direction the appeal treated as partly allowed. 7. In the ground nos. 6 and 7, the assessee has challenged the addition of ₹ 3,28,870/- on account of marriage expenditure added u/s 69C; and addition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s daughter who has shown jewellery worth of ₹ 8,43,000 in Balance Sheet which was used by her in her wedding. In this connection, it is noticed that no jewellery purchase has been shown on account of marriage. Furthermore, it has been stated that there was drawing of ₹ 3,30,000/- by Miss Vidhi Gupta out of which 2,70,000/- was used in her wedding. Thus taking into consideration that the reply submitted by the appellant total marriage expenditure come to ₹ 13,28,130/- is calculated as under:- 1. Shown by assesse by furnishing details: ₹ 9,58,130 2. Incurred by Vijay Gupta assessee's brother: ₹ 1,00,000 3. Incurred by Vidhi Gupta assessee s daughter: ₹ 2,70,000 In this regard, during the course of the appellate proceedings Learned Authorized Representative of the appellant has submitted vide letter dated 10.6.2014 vide para no. 2.14 on the same total marriage expenses has been shown at ₹ 21,71,130/- as under: Your honor on the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red to before us, we find that the Assessing Officer has simply made an estimate of ₹ 25 lakhs simply on the ground that the assessee comes from affluent family and has big stature. Before the Learned CIT (Appeals) the entire break up and source of expenditure has been given, which has been accepted by him at ₹ 21,71,130/-. Once that is so, then there was no point to presume that marriage expenditure would be ₹ 25 lakhs only and therefore, balance amount should be confirmed. There is no enquiry or material information on record to remotely suggest that marriage expenses shown must have been more. Such a reasoning of lower authorities is devoid of any logic and accordingly, we delete the addition of ₹ 3,28,830/-. 12. So far as the issue relating to the addition of ₹ 4,40,277/- towards household expenditure, it is seen that the Assessing Officer has made an addition of ₹ 10 lacs on estimate basis mainly on the ground that the family of assessee consists of wife and four children and therefore, the household expenditure should be at ₹ 10 lacs. Before the Learned CIT (Appeals), the assessee submitted that the expenditure of the family member ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perusal of the relevant findings given in the impugned order, we find that both the authorities have resorted to estimate only. The assessee had stated that he is living in a joint family set up and the entire expenditure shown for the entire joint family was at ₹ 7,59,723/-. However the amount of house hold expenditure declared at ₹ 7,59,723/- appears to be on a lower side looking to the fact that over all family members in a joint family setup would be more. Thus, under the facts and circumstances of the case, addition of ₹ 3 lakhs over and above the sum of ₹ 7,59,723/- as disclosed by the assessee would be sufficient and reasonable. Accordingly, addition of ₹ 3,00,000 is sustained and the assessee gets a part relief on this score. 15. Lastly, with regard to the addition of ₹ 2,88,797/- the relevant findings of the Assessing Officer in this regard reads as under:- In respect income from M/s DLF commercial complexes Ltd., it is seen from their letter dated 11.02.2010, being Annexure-A of the assessee s letter dated. 04.01.2013, that interest of ₹ 29,12,360 was paid to the assessee. However in the assessee's return of income, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
