9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 1687X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enance charges levied by the Society which is not a local authority are not at all allowable to the assessee. Therefore, we held so and accordingly, maintenance charges of four flats are not allowable under the head Income from House Property . As assessee has contended that Godown has been used by assessee for business purposes and therefore, we restore this matter to file of AO for limited purpose of verifying assessee s claim that the godown was used for business purpose during impugned AY or not and if so, allow the deduction for municipal taxes under the head Business Income . So far as regarding, municipal taxes for four properties are concerned, a combined perusal of Statement of Total Income for AY 2006-07 2005-06 strengthens the cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stricting deduction on account of maintenance charges, while computing income under the head "Income from House Property", to ₹ 1,22,956/-, as against the appellant's claim for ₹ 3,74,100/- 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in not considering the correct facts as regards the various flats given out on leave and licence basis. 3. Without prejudice to ground no.1 above, the appellant submits that the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in restricting deduction for municipal taxes (actually paid during the year) to ₹ 61,920/- as against the appellant's claim for ₹ 2,06,028/-. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that an amount of ₹ 7,70,9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch assessee was eligible for statutory deduction of 30% only under Section 24. The assessee agitated the matter before CIT(A) which was partly allowed vide order dated 19/01/2015. The assessee contended that maintenance charges are admissible as deduction. CIT(A) noted that these charges pertained to four properties as per details given below: Flat No. Amount(Rs.) 704 0 (since recovered from tenant) 1101 1,22,956 1102 46,000 1202 1,22,956 Godown 82,188 Total 3,74,100 CIT(A) concluded that since the assessee offered lease income of ₹ 3.00 Lacs against Flat No. 1101 only during the year in question, he was entitled for deduction of ₹ 1,22,956/- only. Accordingly, he partly allowed the claim of the assessee. Similar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otal 1,68,072/- 2,06,028/- Therefore, we find that CIT(A) has erred in allowing two deductions to the extent of ₹ 1,22,956/- & ₹ 61,920/- separately on account of maintenance charges and municipal taxes respectively which pertained to Flat No. 1101 whereas in fact the total amount pertaining to Flat No. 1101 was, in fact, ₹ 1,22,956/- inclusive of municipal taxes. Further, when Income is calculated under the head House Property, then besides statutory deduction of 30% u/s 24, an assessee is entitled only for deduction with respect to taxes levied by any local authority. Therefore, society maintenance charges levied by the Society which is not a local authority are not at all allowable to the assessee. Therefore, we held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
