ITO 3(3)(1), MUMBAI V. RAJRATNA HOLDINGS P.LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 1742/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 87867 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-01-2015
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 04-03-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AKHILENDRA YADAV

Judgement Text

, , , ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES D MUMBAI , , ! ' BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER . / ITA NO.1742/MUM/2013 #$ #$ #$ #$ %$ %$ %$ %$ / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 ITO-3(3)(1), ROOM NO.672, 6 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M.K. ROAD, MUMBAI-400020 VS. M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. 212, T.V. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, 52, S.K. AHIRE MARG, WORLI, MUMBAI-400030 ( ! / REVENUE) ( &'() /RESPONDENT) P.A. NUMBER : AAACR2896G ! * ** * + + + + /REVENUE BY : SHRI AKHILENDRA YADAV &'() * ** * + + + + /RESPONDENT BY SHRI ANUJ KISNADWALA # * , / DATE OF HEARING : 01/01/2015 -.% * , / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02/01/2015 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JM: THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATE D 03/10/2012 OF THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, MU MBAI, ON THE GROUND WHETHER THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORIT Y WAS JUSTIFIED IN HOLDING THAT THE ANNUAL VALUE HAS TO B E DETERMINED 2 M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. . WITH REFERENCE TO ACTUAL RENT RECEIVABLE BY THE ASS ESSEE AND NOT THE MARKET VALUE ADOPTED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER W ITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT SECTION 23(1)(A) OF THE ACT W AS INVOKED. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, SHRI AKHILENDRA YADAV, L D. DR ADVANCED HIS ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING THE ASSESSMENT OR DER BY CONTENDING THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER MADE ENQUIRIE S FROM THE AREA/MARKET AND FOUND THAT THE RENTAL IN THE AREA W AS VERY HIGH FOR MUCH SMALLER FLATS WITH SINGLE CAR PARKING. IT WAS ALSO CONTENDED THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) REACHED TO A PARTICULAR CONCLUSION IGNORING THE FACTS RECOR DED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER. 2.1. ON THE OTHER HAND, SHRI ANUJ KISNADWALA, LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED THAT THE ISSUE UNDER HAND IS COV ERED BY THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF CO-OWNER OF THE PROPERTY ORDER DATED 19/12/2014 (ITA NO.9212/MUM/2010 & ITA NO.2608/MUM/2013). THIS FACTUAL MATRIX WAS NOT CON TROVERTED BY THE REVENUE WITH THE HELP OF THE ANY POSITIVE MA TERIAL. 2.2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND P ERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. BEFORE COMING TO ANY CONCLUSION, WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE RELEVANT PORTION OF T HE ORDER DATED 19/12/2014, ITA NO.9212/MUM/2010 FOR READY REFERENC E:- 3. AT THE OUTSET, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE BROU GHT OUR ATTENTION TO THE ISSUE RAISED IN GROUND NO.2 OF THE APPEAL AND MENTIONED THAT THE SAID ISSUE RELATES TO 3 M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. . DETERMINATION OF ALV IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY WHI CH IS COVERED BY THE RENT CONTROL ACT. IN THIS REGARD, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE FILED A LETTER FROM THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY WHERE THE IMPUGNED PROPERTY IS SITUATED. AS PER THE SAME, THE RATEABLE VALUE IS RS . 9,340/-. THE SAID AMOUNT IS LESSER THAN THE ACTUAL RENT RECEIVED OF RS.80,000/- PER MONTH BY FOUR PARTIES A ND THE ASSESSEE S SHARE COMES TO RS. 20,000/-PER MONTH. ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE SAME AND COMPUTED TH E ALV AT RS.77,17,248/- RELYING ON THE FIGURES MENTIO NED IN THE STAMP DUTY READY RECKONER (PARA 6 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS RELEVANT). AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAM E, ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A). 4. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLAT E AUTHORITY, ASSESSEE MENTIONED THAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER IS NOT FREE TO ADOPT THE FIGURES AND THE SA ME IS IN VIOLATION OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 23(1)(B) OF T HE ACT. CIT (A) CONSIDERED THE VARIOUS SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS RELIED UPO N BY HIM AND DISAPPROVED THE ASSESSING OFFICER S DECISION. IN THIS REGARD, CIT (A) RELIED ON THE JUD GMENT OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. AKSHAY TEXTILE TRADING & AGENCY (P) LTD REPORTE D IN 304 ITR 401 (BOM) AND HELD THAT ALV HAS TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF THE ACTUAL RENT RECEIVAB LE ON 4 M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. . PROPERTYAS A RENT. PARA 6 IS RELEVANT IN THIS REGAR D. AGGRIEVED WITH THE SAME, REVENUE IS IN APPEAL WITH THIS ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE AYS 2007-08 AND 2009-2010 UNDER CONSIDERATION. 5. DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, TO SUPPORT THE VIEWS OF THE CIT (A), FILE D A COPY OF ANOTHER BINDING JUDGMENT OF THE HON BLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TI P TOP TYPOGRAPHY [2014] 368 ITR 330 (BOM) FOR IDENTICAL PROPOSITION IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY COVERED UNDE R THE RENT CONTROL ACT. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD DR RELIED O N THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES AND ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES AS WELL AS THE RELEVANT MATERIAL PLACED BEFORE US, WE FIND, THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) ON THI S ISSUE GIVEN IN PARA 6 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS FAIR AND REASONABLE AND IT DOES NOT CALL FOR ANY INTERFERENC E. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO.2 RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 2.3. WE FIND THAT WHILE COMING TO A PARTICULAR CONC LUSION, THAT TOO IN THE CASE OF CO-OWNER OF THE IMPUGNED PROPERT Y, THE TRIBUNAL, IN THE AFORESAID ORDER RELIED UPON THE DE CISION FROM HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CI T VS TIP TOP TYPOGRAPHY (2014) 368 ITR 330 (BOM), FOR IDENTICAL PROPOSITION, IN RESPECT OF PROPERTY COVERED UNDER THE RENT CONTR OL ACT. IN THE 5 M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. . AFORESAID CASE, THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED A LETTER FR OM THE COOPERATIVE SOCIETY WHERE THE IMPUGNED PROPERTY IS SITUATED AS PER WHICH THE RATEABLE VALUE IS RS.9,340/- WHICH IS LESSER THAN THE ACTUAL RENT OF RS.18,000/- PER MONTH BY FOUR PA RTIES OUT OF EACH THE SHARE OF THE ASSESSEE COMES TO RS.20,000 P ER MONTH. THE LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, ON THE OTHER HAND, COMPU TED THE ALV AT RS.77,17,248/-, RELYING UPON FIGURES MENTIONED I N STAMP DUTY READY RECKONER. RELIANCE HAS ALREADY BEEN PLA CED BY THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF AKSHAY TEXTILE TRADING & AG ENCY (P.) LTD. 304 ITR 401 (BOM), WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT ALV HAS TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF ACTUAL RENT RECEIVABLE. IN VIEW OF THESE FACTS, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION FR OM HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND ALSO OF THE COORDINAT E BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE CONCLUSI ON DRAWN BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), RESULTING INTO DISMISSAL OF THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE. FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. THIS ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT IN THE PRESENCE OF LD. REPRESENTATIVES FROM BOTH SIDES AT THE CONCLUSI ON OF THE HEARING ON 01/01/2015. SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (JOGINDER SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED - 02/01/2015 6 M/S RAJRATNA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. . F{X~{T? P.S/. # . . / / / / * ** * &,0 &,0 &,0 &,0 10%, 10%, 10%, 10%, / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. () / THE APPELLANT 2. &'() / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 2 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 2 / CIT 5. 034 &,# , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 4$ 5 / GUARD FILE. /# /# /# /# / BY ORDER, '0, &, //TRUE COPY// 6 66 6 / 7 7 7 7 (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI