2012 (2) TMI 683

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 3.2.2011 of CIT(A) for the assessment year 2005-06. The only dispute raised is regarding annual value of second house property which was self occupied by the assessee. 2. Facts in brief are that the assessee owned two house properties one at Ahmedabad and the other at Mumbai and both were self occupied. Income from Mumbai property .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the assessee submitted that the annual value of second SOP should be determined on the basis of Municipal Rateable Value (MRV). The ld. AR also pointed out that the property was covered by Rent Control Act, and therefore, ALV could not exceed the standard rent determined under the Rent Control Act. The ld. DR on the other hand supported the orders of authorities below. 4. We have perused .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ct in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Sheila Kaushik (131 ITR 435). This aspect has not been examined by the authorities below. We, therefore, set aside the order of CIT(A) and restore the matter back to the file of AO for passing a fresh order after necessary examination in the light of the observations made above and after providing an opportunity of hearing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X