V.Geethalakshmi, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 10/CHNY/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5898 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 06-07-2017
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 03-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B SAGADEVAN JCIT D R
• Assessee Lawyers: K MEENAKSHISUNDARAM ITP

Judgement Text

, C/ SMC , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C/SMC BENCH, CHENNAI . , BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A.NO.10 /MDS./2017 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ) MRS.V.GEETHALAKSHMI, NO.21, RAIN TREE APARATMENTS, D-BLOCK, 4A VENUS COLONY, 2 ND CROSS STREET, CHENNAI-18. VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD CV(1), CHENNAI. PAN AAIPG 3606 Q ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : MR.K.MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM ITP / RESPONDENT BY : MR.B.SAGADEVAN, JCIT, D.R ! ' / DATE OF HEARING : 07.11.2017 #$%& ! ' /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.11.2017 / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A)-4, CHENNA I DATED 19.10.2016 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. ITA NO. 10/MDS/2017 2 2. THE FIRST GROUND IN HER APPEAL IS WITH REGARD T O CONSIDERING THE RENTAL INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AT MKN ROAD, GUI NDY, CHENNAI AT ` 4,33,440/-. 3. THE FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE PROPERTY AT MKN ROAD WAS LET OUT TO HELIX SEATING. SINCE THE PROPERTY WAS UNDER DISPUTE, THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT OFFERED THE RENTAL INCOME FOR TAXA TION. HOWEVER, THE AO BROUGHT THE RENT INTO TAX. 3.1 BEFORE US, THE LD.A.R SUBMITTED THAT THE SAID PROPERTY IS SUBJECT TO LITIGATION AND THE CASE WAS FINALLY COMPROMISED WITH THE ASSESSEE VIDE ORDER OF PRINCIPAL DISTRICT MUNSIF AT ALANDUR IN RCOP NO.82/2008 DATED 7 TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2009. CONSEQUENT TO THE ORDER OF CO URT, THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT RECEIVED ANY RENT FROM THE SAID PR EMISES. 3.2 THE LD.D.R SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT PLACED THE COMPROMISED PETITION BEFORE THE ASSESSING AUTHORITY , HENCE, THE AO DOES NOT KNOW EXACT AGREEMENT MADE BETWEEN THE PART IES. 4. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. AS RIGHTLY POINTED OUT BY THE LD.D.R, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO PLACE ON RECORD THE COMPROMISE PETITION FILED BEFOR E PRINCIPAL DISTRICT MUNSIF AT ALANDUR WHILE PURSUING THE CASE. ACCORDI NGLY, I REMIT THE ITA NO. 10/MDS/2017 3 ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A D IRECTION TO THE ASSESSEE TO PLACE NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER TO SHOW THE EXACT NATURE OF THE COMPROMISE AND THEREAFTER, THE AO DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH. ACCORDINGLY, THE IS SUE IN DISPUTE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER WITH THE ABOVE DIRECTION. 5. THE SECOND GROUND IN HER APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST MONEY OBTAINED BY MORTGAGING THE LAND A T KALAIMAGAL NAGAR AT ` 7,27,015/- AND DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST PAID TO IND IA BULLS COMPANY AT ` 14,87,217/-. 6. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE M ATERIAL ON RECORD. IN MY OPINION, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE A BOVE INTEREST WHILE COMPUTING INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. THE SAME WAS DISALLOWED ON THE REASON THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT DEMONSTRATED THE UTILIZATION OF SAID LOAN FOR ACQUI SITION OF THE PURCHASE OF THE HOUSE PROPERTY. BEFORE ME, THE ASS ESSEE MADE A PLEA THAT ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY MAY BE GIVEN TO PLAC E NECESSARY EVIDENCE BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. CONSIDERING THE REQUEST OF THE ITA NO. 10/MDS/2017 4 ASSESSEE, I REMIT THIS ISSUE ALSO TO THE FILE OF LD . ASSESSING OFFICER WITH A DIRECTION TO ASSESSEE TO PLACE NECESSARY EVI DENCE FOR UTILIZATION OF LOAN AND ON UTILIZING THE SAID LOAN FOR THE PURPOSE OF PURCHASE OR ACQUISITION OF HOUSE PROPERTY, WHICH IS SUBJECT TO INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, THE INTEREST TO BE ALLOWED AS A DEDUCTION FROM INCOME. ACCORDINGLY, THIS ISSUE IS REMITTED TO THE FILE OF LD. ASSESSING OFFICER FOR FRESH CONSIDERATION. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 07 TH NOVEMBER, 2017. SD/- ( ) ( CHANDRA POOJARI ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED THE 07 TH NOVEMBER, 2017 . K S SUNDARAM. ' ( )!*+ ,+%! / COPY TO: 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ' ' -! () / CIT(A) 5. +0 1 )!)23 / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ' ' -! / CIT 6. 1 45 6 / GF