9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1477X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ALV by taking the MRV as the base and increase it by 5% every year. Commissioner (Appeals) while giving such direction has followed the order passed by him in case of Smt. Laxmi Satyapal Jain, one of the family members - while deciding the issue in case of the aforesaid family member, the Tribunal in the order referred to above has disagreed with the aforesaid decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and directed the Assessing Officer to determine the ALV as per MRV. As respectfully following the aforesaid decisions of the Tribunal in assessee own case as well as in case of other family members, we direct the Assessing Officer to determine the ALV of the vacant flat as per MRV. In case, it is found that ALV determined by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmissions of the assessee, learned Commissioner (Appeals) restricted the ALV to ₹ 17,03,369. The aforesaid order of learned Commissioner (Appeals) was challenged, both, by the assessee and the Revenue before the Tribunal. After considering the submissions of the parties, the Tribunal restored the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. In pursuance to the directions of the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer took up the assessment proceedings again and in course of such proceedings, called upon the assessee to explain as to why the ALVof the property should not be determined as per fair rent. Though, the assessee stuck to her stand that ALV of the property should be determined as per MRV, however, the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foresaid decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals), both, the assessee and the Revenue again came in appeal before the Tribunal. However, Revenue s appeal was dismissed due to low tax effect. 6. The learned Authorised Representative submitted, the direction of learned Commissioner (Appeals) to increase the MRV by 5% every year for arriving at the ALV is not in accordance with the settled position of law. He submitted, the assessee has determined the ALV as per MRV which is the accepted method to determine the ALV. He submitted, learned Commissioner (Appeals) while directing the Assessing Officer to re compute the ALV by increasing 5% on the MRV every year has followed his own order passed in case of Smt. Laxmi Satyapal Jain, for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... evident, learned Commissioner (Appeals) while giving such direction has followed the order passed by him in case of Smt. Laxmi Satyapal Jain, one of the family members. However, while deciding the issue in case of the aforesaid family member, the Tribunal in the order referred to above has disagreed with the aforesaid decision of learned Commissioner (Appeals) and directed the Assessing Officer to determine the ALV as per MRV. In fact, in assessee s own case in assessment years 2011 12, 2012 13 and 2013 14, the Tribunal while deciding identical issue in ITA no.3893/Mum./2017 Ors., dated 22nd March 2019, has held that determination of ALV on ad hoc basis by making 5% increase over the MRV is not acceptable. Further, the Tribunal has direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
