9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 643X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent by computing income from house property under section 23(1)(a) of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) and Ld. AO failed to appreciate that the provisions of Sec. 22 and 23 were clearly not applicable on the facts and in the circumstances of the case in law. It is submitted that even if the contentions of the Ld. AO are accepted, the appellant is entitled to deduction for vacancy allowance u/s. 23(1)(c) of the Act as the said property remained vacant throughout the year. 3. The CIT(A) and AO failed to appreciate that income from House Property Section 23(1)(c) of the Act cannot exceed the standard rent and or municipal ratable value thereof. 4. It is submitted that the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) is arbitrary and bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and calculated notional income from house property and allowed the statuary deduction u/s. 24 of the Act and determined income from house property of Rs. 13,00,681/- and passed the order u/s. 143(3) dated 27.03.2016 with total income of Rs. 39,83,81,500/-. 3. Aggrieved by the A.O. order, the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal and findings of the A.O. and submissions of the assessee referred at para 4.1 of the order on chargeability of income from house property. The CIT(A) found that in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2014-15 the appellate authority has decided against the assessee and therefore in the present assessment year, the CIT(A) has confirmed the action of the A.O. and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... JD Mistry contended that premise has not at all be let out during the concerned assessment year. He submitted in several case laws, it has been held by the Tribunal that if the house property could not be let out the assessee was very much entitled to vacancy allowance and hence, no notional rent should be attributable. In this regard he referred to catena of decisions of ITAT in this regard as under:- Premsudha (P). Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2008) 110 ITD 158. Informed Technologies India Ltd., Vs. DCIT, 162 ITD 153 Vikas Keshav Garud Vs. ITO, 160 ITD 7 ITO Vs. Metaoxide Ltd., 170 ITD 235 Sachin R. Tendulkar Vs. DCIT, 169 DTR 169 ACIT Vs. Prabha Sanghi, 139 ITD 504 Kamal Mishra Vs. ITO, 19 SOT 251 8. However, Ld counsel of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t rejection of the same. If that is taken to be a safe guide, then, to discard it there must be cogent and reliable material. (ii) The market rate in the locality is an approved method for determining the fair rental value but it is only when the AO is convinced that the case before him is suspicious, determination by the parties is doubtful that he can resort to enquire about the prevailing rate in the locality. The municipal ratable value may not be binding on the AO but that is only in cases of afore referred nature. It is definitely a safe guide. 9. Accordingly, we remit this issue to the file of the AO if the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in assessee's own case is available the same has to be fallowed. Otherwise the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
