9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . AO have erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs.25,41,859 under the head salaries without considering the facts of the appellant's case. 3. The Ld. AO have erred in law and on facts in making addition of Rs.25,41,859 under the head salaries merely based on Form No. 26AS. 4. Ld. CIT(Appeals) have also The Ld. AO have erred in law and on facts in determining the total income of Rs.25,02,107 by adopting figure of gross salary of Rs.26,26,187 and by reducing deduction of Rs.1,24,080 under Chapter VI-A of the Act. 5. The Ld. ITO as well the Ld. CIT(A) have erred in law and on facts in not giving the benefit of Sec. 10 and thereby not allowing the deduction of House rent paid by him of Rs.4,04,060 claimed by the appellant. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and the High Courts have not been considered. The Tribunal in ITA no. 715/Ahd/2013 in the case of Bajrang Prasad Vs. ACIT 60 SOT 66 has held as under: "7. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and the orders of the authorities below. We find that the AO disallowed the claim of the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not given details of payment and evidences and also on the basis that the assessee and his wife are living together, hence the claim of payment of rent is just to avoid payment of taxes and to reduce the tax liability. Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the addition on the ground that the rent is paid by the assessee as a tenant to his wife who is a landlord and he found that the landlord and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uate and other relevant considerations. Explanation.-For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that nothing contained in this clause shall apply in a case where- (a) the residential accommodation occupied by the assessee is owned by him; or (b) the assessee has not actually incurred expenditure on payment of rent (by whatever name called) in respect of the residential accommodation occupied by him; 7.1. From the reading of the above section, it is clear that the requirement of the section is that any allowance (by whatever name called) granted to an assessee by his employer to meet expenditure actually incurred on payment of rent in respect of residential accommodation occupied by the assessee, to such extent as may be prescr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t to the assessee. This ground is also allowed as indicated above." 6. Further, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M.S. Gujral , Chief Justice (1980) 125 ITR 655, has held as under: "3. A similar question came up for consideration before this court in CIT v. Justice S. C. Mittal [1980] 121 ITR 503 and CIT v. Shri B. R. Tuli (I.T.R, Nos. 58 to 61 of 1979) [1980] 125 ITR 460 (P & H) and this court, vide Bench judgments dated 21st November, 1979, answered the question against the revenue and in favour of the assessees. It was held in Justice S. C. Mittal's case [1980] 121 ITR 503 (P & H) as under (at p. 505): "The provisions of Section 10(13A) of the Act have been enacted to compensate the assessee regardin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section. Even if the assessee's case is covered by the Rules, the assessee will be entitled to exemption. The Rules impose the maximum limit to the extent of Rs. 400 per month. Admittedly, the house rent allowance paid to Mr. Justice S. C. Mittal during all the four relevant assessment years was below the maximum prescribed limit. It is equally well settled that even if two interpretations of a particular provision are possible, in that case, the IT. Act, being a taxing statute, one favourable to the assessee would be preferred. The view taken by the Tribunal in this regard is unexceptional. " 5. In view of the Bench decision in Justice S. C. Mittal's case [1980] 121 ITR 503 (P & H), we answer the question referred to us in the n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the Rules, the compensation paid to the assessee by his employer, cannot be subjected to tax. The Tribunal accepted the interpretation of the relevant provisions of the Act and we do not find any reason to take a different view than the one taken by the Tribunal. 7. Even otherwise, on the facts of the present case, it is clear that half of the house of Mr. Justice S.C. Mittal, which he was occupying, is owned by him and the remaining half portion of the house is owned by his brother to whom he has been paying the rent at the rate of Rs. 300 per month. Thus, it cannot be said that, on the facts and circumstances of this case, Mr. Justice S.C. Mittal has not incurred any expenditure even though he having paid a rent of Rs. 300 per month t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
