REKHA TIKAM VASWANI, MUMBAI V. ITO 12(2)(4), MUMBAI

ITA 1861/MUM/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4995 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 24 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 13-09-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 25-07-2013
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 19-03-2012
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D K SINHA
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH D, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R. S. SYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER SL ITA NO. A.Y. APPELLANT ADDRESS RESPONDENT PAN 1 ITA NO. 1861/M/2012 2002-03 REKHA TIKAM VASWANI VASWANI GARDENS, 25 SOBANI ROAD, CUFF PARADE, MUMBAI-. 400 005 ITO 12(2)(4) MUMBAI. ADKPV 3657 M 2 ITA NO. 1862/M/2012 2003-04 REKHA TIKAM VASWANI DO ITO 12(2)(3) MUMBAI. ADKPV 3657 M 3 ITA NO. 658/M/2010 2004-05 REKHA TIKAM VASWANI DO ITO WD 12(2)(1) MUMBAI. ADKPV 3657 M 4 ITA NO. 1863/M/2012 2002-03 TIKAM VASWANI DO ITO 12(2)(4) MUMBAI. AAEPV 3345 H 5 ITA NO. 954/M/2009 2002-03 SUSHIL T. VASWANI DO ITO (IT) RG 2(1) MUMBAI. AAEPV 1830 H 6 ITA NO. 1717/M/2012 2002-03 RAVI H. VASWANI DO ASST CIT 12(2) MUMBAI. AAFPV 4011 M 7 ITA NO. 1707/M/2012 2002-03 JANAK H. VASWANI DO ASST CIT 12(2) MUMBAI. AAFPV 1828 P ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 2 APPELLANT BY : SHRI KISHOR CHAUDHARI RESPONDENT BY : SHRI D. K. SINHA DATE OF HEARING : 25.07.2013 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 13.09.2013 O R D E R PER DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN, JM: THIS BUNCH OF SEVEN APPEALS BY A GROUP OF ASSESSEE S ARE DIRECTED AGAINST SEPARATE ORDERS OF THE LD.CIT(A) -23, MUMBAI FOR TH E RESPECTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS AS AFOREMENTIONED IN THE CAUSE TITLE. SINCE COMMON ISSUES ARE INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS, ALL THE APPEALS ARE DISPOSED BY THIS COMMO N ORDER. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, THE FACTS OF THE CASE IN ITA NO. 1861/ M/2012 IN REKHA T. VASWANI ARE TAKEN AS A LEAD CASE FOR ADJUDICATING ALL THE APPEA LS. I. ITA NO. 1861/M/2012-REKHA T. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2 002-03 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FROM THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RELATES TO THE COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY ON THE BASIS FAIR REN TAL VALUE ADOPTED BY THE AO AND THE SAME CONFIRMED BY THE LD.CIT(A). 2.1 THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HOLDS 30% SHARE IN THE FLAT NO. 113, NCPA, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI. THE SAID FLAT HAD BEEN LET OUT TO M/S. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD. FOR A MONTHLY RENT OF RS.70,000/-. AFTER DEDUC TING THE EXPENSES & STATUTORY DEDUCTION U/S 24 AND AFTER MAKING ALLOWANCE FOR VAC ANCY THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY WAS COMPUTED AT RS.6,126/-. HOWEVER, THE A O FOUND THAT IN THE SAME BUILDING, FLAT NO. 34 HAD BEEN RENTED OUT ON LEASE FOR A MONTHLY RENT OF RS.2,75,000/- AND IN THAT CASE NO INTEREST FREE DEP OSIT HAS BEEN TAKEN. THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE MARKET VALUE OF THE RENT IN THE C ASE OF THE ASSESSEE LOCATED IN THE SAME BUILDING COULD NOT BE LOWER. ACCORDINGLY, THE AO, ADOPTED THE FRV OF THE PROPERTY AT RS.2,75,000/- PER MONTH AND THE SHARE O F THE ASSESSEE @ 30% IN THE ALV WAS COMPUTED AT RS.9,90,000/-. THE ASSESSEE PRE FERRED APPEAL TO THE LD.CIT(A) ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 3 WHO CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. THE ASSESSEE FI LED SECOND APPEAL IN THE ITAT AND THE ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 09.09.2009 IN ITA 379 0/M/2007 RESTORED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING A FRESH ORDE R AFTER MAKING NECESSARY EXAMINATION WHETHER THE PROPERTY WAS COVERED UNDER THE RENT CONTROL ACT AND TO ALLOW OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. IN PR OCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 OF THE I.T. ACT, THE AO AFTER FINDING THAT THE RENT CO NTROL ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE, HAS PROCEEDED TO DETERMINE ALV ON THE BASIS OF COMPARAB LE CASE OF A PROPERTY IN THE SAME BUILDING/SOCIETY ON THE BASIS OF ENQUIRIES MADE DURING THE SCRUTINY PROCEEDINGS FOUND OUT THAT IN THE SAME BUILDING THE FLATS ARE G IVEN ON RENT FOR RS.2,75,000/- PER MONTH. AFTER CONSIDERING THE CERTIFICATE GIVEN BY T HE ASSESSEE FROM THE SOCIETY THAT THE SAID FLAT WAS OF AREA 3475 SQ. FEET AND THE ARE A OF THE ASSESSEE IS 2880 SQ. FEET, THE AO HAD CALCULATED THE FRV PROPORTIONATELY AS UN DER: THE RENT RECEIVED FOR THE FLAT LET OUT IN THE SAME BUILDING HAVING BUILT UP AREA OF 3475 SQ FEET RS.2,75,000/- PER MONTH (AS PER CERTIFICATE SUBMITTED BY THE ASSESSEE.) THE FRV OF THE FLAT OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING BUILT UP AREA OF 2880 SQ. FEET IS 2,75,000 X 2880 =RS. 2,27,913/- X 12 = 27,34,956/- 3475 ASSESSEES SHARE 30% I.E. 9,11,652/- ANNUAL LETTING OUT VALUE 9 ,11,652/- AFTER ALLOWING EXPENSES AND DEDUCTION U/S 24(A) AS ALSO VACANCY ALLOWANCE, THE REVISED ALV WAS ADOPTED AT RS.4,24,903/-. 2.1.1 ON APPEAL, THE LD.CIT(A) UPHELD THE ACTION OF THE AO IN COMPUTING THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY BY ADOPTING THE ALV ON T HE BASIS OF A COMPARABLE CASE IN THE SAME SOCIETY, AND ON THE BASIS OF THE AREA A S PER CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SOCIETY. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THE ASSES SEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 2.2 BEFORE US, THE LD AR OF THE ASSESSEE HAS TAKEN THE SAME PLEA THAT HE HAS TAKEN BEFORE THE LOWER AUTHORITIES WHICH INTER ALIA INCLUDES THAT THE AO IN ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 4 ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 31.03.2005 HAS COMPARED THE RENT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE WITH THAT RECEIVED BY A THIRD PARTY NAMELY M/S. GUJ ARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD. (GACL) WHO HAVE LET OUT ANOTHER FLAT IN THE SAME PREMISES. BOTH THE PROPERTIES HAVE DIFFERENT FEATURES AND FLAT OF GACL IS SUBSTANTIALL Y BIGGER THAN THE ASSESSEES FLAT. THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED INTEREST FREE DEPOSIT FRO M THE TENANT WHICH IS NOT THE CASE OF GACL. WHERE A HIGH DEPOSIT HAD BEEN TAKEN B Y THE LANDLORD, THE RENT RECEIVED WOULD BE PROPORTIONATELY LOW AS COMPARED T O ANOTHER FLAT WHERE NO DEPOSITS HAVE BEEN TAKEN. RELIANCE HAS BEEN PLACED ON ITAT DECISION IN DELITE ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD. (22 SOT 245 AND BOMBAY HIGH C OURT DECISION IN J K INVESTORS (BOMBAY) LTD. 248 ITR 723, ITAT DECISIONS IN MRS. G ITA MIRCHANDANI (4 SOT 353). ACCORDING TO THE LD.AR, THE ALV OF THE PROPERTY IS TO BE COMPUTED AS THE ACTUAL RENT RECEIVED OR MUNICIPAL RATABLE VALUE WHICHEVER IS HI GHER. SINCE RENT RECEIVED IS HIGHER THAN THE MUNICIPAL RATABLE VALUE THE HIGHER OF THE TWO COULD BE ACCEPTED. THAT THE SAID PROPERTY IS NOT COVERED UNDER RENT CONTROL ACT AND THE ALV HAS TO BE CALCULATED ON THE BASIS OF MUNICIPAL RATABLE VALUE AND AS THE ACTUAL RENT RECEIVED IS MORE THAN THE MUNICIPAL RATABLE VALUE THE SAME HAS TO BE TAKE N AS FRV. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD.DR HAS PLACED HIS ARGUMENTS RELYING ON THE FINDI NGS OF THE AO AND THE LD.CIT(A). 2.3 WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT IN THE PRESENT CASE, THE ITAT EARLIER HAS DIRECTED THAT IN CASE THE PROPERTY IS NOT COVERED UNDER THE RENT CON TROL ACT, THE ALV HAS TO BE DETERMINED ON THE BASIS OF THE FAIR RENTAL VALUE IN THE MARKET AFTER CONSIDERING ALL RELEVANT FACTS, AND HELD THAT IN SUCH CASES THE STA NDARD RENT OR THE ANNUAL RATABLE VALUE WILL NOT BE THE FAIR RENTAL VALUE OF THE PROP ERTY. THE AO HAS FOLLOWED THE DIRECTIONS OF ITAT, AND AFTER FINDING THAT THE RENT CONTROL ACT IS NOT APPLICABLE, HAS PROCEEDED TO DETERMINE ALV ON THE BASIS OF COMPARAB LE CASE OF A PROPERTY IN THE SAME BUILDING/SOCIETY, GIVING COGENT REASONS FOR AD OPTING THE SAME. THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVE ALSO BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE AO GIVING REASONS FOR NOT FINDING THEM ACCEPTABLE. IT IS ALSO RELEVANT TO NOT E THAT THE LD.CIT(A), WHILE CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO HAS CORRECTLY OBSER VED THAT THE ITAT DECISION HAS ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 5 TAKEN NOTE OF ITAT DECISION IN M/S. BAKER TECHNICAL SERVICES P. LTD. IN ITA NO. 5262- 5264/MUM/2006, ORDER DATED 12.08.2009, IN WHICH IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT IN A PROPERTY NOT SUBJECT TO RENT CONTROL ACT, THE ALV W AS NOT TO BE RESTRICTED TO THE STANDARD RENT AS PER THE RENT CONTROL ACT. THIS POS ITION IS ALSO SUPPORTED BY OTHER DECISIONS. IN DCIT V RITA A PAREKH 2006, 10 SOT 779 , MUMBAI ITAT HAS HELD THAT WHERE IT WAS SHOWN THAT WHERE THE MONTHLY RENT WHIC H COULD BE RECEIVED WAS HIGHER THAN IN CASES WHERE SECURITY DEPOSIT WAS NOT RECEIV ED, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS JUSTIFIED IN COMPUTING ALV AT A HIGHER VALUE. IN VI EW OF THAT MATTER, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFIABLE REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE AO IN COMPUTING THE INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY BY ADOPTING THE ALV ON THE BASIS OF A COMPARABLE CASE IN THE SAME SOCIE TY AND ON THE BASIS OF THE AREA AS PER CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE SOCIETY AND THE SA ME IS UPHELD. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . II. ITA NO. 1862/M/2012-REKHA TIKAM VASWANI FOR THE A.Y . 2003-04 3. IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT THE SAME ISSUE IS RAISE D IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL IN RESPECT OF THE SAME PROPERTY DURING THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IN THIS APPEAL ALSO, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE ADJUDICATION OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR THE YEAR 2002-03 AS AF OREMENTIONED. III. ITA NO. 658/M/2010-REKHA TIKAM VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2004-05 4. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE SIDES AND PERUSED THE MATE RIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT GROUND NO 1 OF THE APPEAL RELATES TO THE SAME ISSUE OF COMPUTATION OF INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY ON THE BASIS FAIR RENTAL VALUE ADOPTED BY THE AO AND THE LD.CIT(A)S DIRECTION TO THE AO TO COMPUTE THE ALV IN TERMS OF THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA 3790/M/2007 FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03. SINCE THE DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE LD.CIT(A) IS BASED ON THE DE CISION OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE A.Y.2002-03, WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE DECISION OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT AND THE SAME IS UPHE LD. ACCORDINGLY, GROUND NO 1 IS DISMISSED. ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 6 5. GROUND NO 2 RELATES TO THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE OF 50% AND 25% OF THE EXPENSES RESPECTIVELY ON CAR EXPENSES AND TELEPHONE & FAX EXPENSES MADE BY THE AO ON THE GROUND THAT THE SAME INVOLVES PERSONAL US E AND THE SAME RESTRICTED BY THE LD.CIT TO THE EXTENT OF 20%. HAVING NOTED THE C ONTENTION OF THE REVENUE THAT THE EXPENSES ARE SUCH THAT PERSONAL USE CANNOT BE R ULED OUT AND THE ASSESSEES CONTENTION THAT THE EXPENSES ARE SOLELY INCURRED FO R THE PURPOSE OF THE BUSINESS, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT IT WOULD BE JUST AN D FAIR THAT THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE ON THE IMPUGNED EXPENSES ARE RESTRICTED TO 10%. WE DIRECT AND ORDER ACCORDINGLY. AS REGARDS THE ADHOC DISALLOWANCE ON CONVEYANCE AND SALARY EXPENSES, SINCE THE LD.CIT(A) HAS ALREADY RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE T O 10%, WHICH WE CONSIDER AS JUST AND FAIR AS THE EXPENSES ARE NOT VERIFIABLE, THE DE CISION OF THE LD.CIT(A) ON THIS COUNT IS UPHELD. GROUND NO 2 IS PARTLY ALLOWED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED . IV. ITA NO 1863/M/2012-TIKAM VASWANI FOR THE A.Y.2002-0 3 7. AFTER NOTING THAT THE PRESENT ASSESSEE IS ALSO O NE OF THE CO-OWNER OF THE SAME PROPERTY I.E., FLAT NO. 113, NCPA, NARIMAN POI NT, MUMBAI WHO HOLDS 30% SHARE IN THE SAID PROPERTY AND CONSIDERING THAT AN IDENTI CAL ISSUE IS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF PRESENT APPEAL, FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE AD JUDICATION OF THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1861/M/2012-REKHA T. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03 A S AFOREMENTIONED FROM PARA 2 TO 2.3 OF THIS ORDER, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. V. ITA NO 954/M/2012-SUSHIL T.VASWANI FOR THE A.Y.2002 -03 8. HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE MA TERIAL ON RECORD, IT IS OBSERVED THAT THOUGH THE ISSUES RAISED IN GROUND NO 1 OF THE PRESENT APPEAL PERTAINS TO THE SAME PROPERTY IN WHICH THE PRESENT ASSESSEE IS ALSO A CO-OWNER WITH THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 1861/M/2012-REKHA T. VASWAN I FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03, THIS IS THE FIRST ROUND OF APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) WHEREAS THE ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 09.09.2009 IN ITA 3790/M/2007 RESTORED THE MATTER PERTAINS TO REKHA ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 7 T. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03 IN THE FIRST ROUND OF APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING A FRESH ORDER AFTER MAKING NECESSARY EXAMINATION WHETHER THE PROPERTY WAS COVERED UNDER THE RENT CONTROL ACT AND TO ALLOW OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. NO DOUBT, IN THE ORDER GIVING EFFE CT TO THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE SAID CASE, THE AO FOUND THAT THE PROPERTY IS NO T COVERED UNDER THE RENT CONTROL ACT. HOWEVER, WHILE COMPUTING THE ALV OF THE PROPER TY IN THE REKHA T. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03, THE AO HAS DONE A FRESH ASSESSMEN T CONSIDERING THE DIRECTIONS OF THE ITAT. IN VIEW OF THAT MATTER, WE ARE OF THE CON SIDERED OPINION THAT THIS GROUND IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR PASSING A FRESH ORDER WITH THE SIMILAR DIRECTION GIVEN BY THE ITAT VIDE ORDER DATED 09.09. 2009 IN ITA 3790/M/2007. WE DIRECT AND ORDER ACCORDINGLY. GROUND NO 1 IS ALLOWE D FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. 9. GROUND NO 2 RELATES TO THE DECISION OF THE LD.CI T(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE IN RESPECT OF INTEREST PAID OF RS. 1,5 7,170/- BY THE ASSESSEE TO VAIBHAV ESTATES IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS A PARTNER. 9.1 BRIEFLY STATED, DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YE AR, THE ASSESSEE HAD RECEIVED INCOME FROM SAVINGS BANK ACCOUNT OF RS.16,856/- AND SHARE OF INTEREST FROM VASWANI TRUST AT RS.13,439. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO C LAIMED DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF INTEREST PAID TO VAIBHAV ESTATE OF RS.1,57,170. THE AO HAD HOWEVER HELD THAT INTEREST PAID TO VAIBHAV ESTATES OF RS.1,57,170/- I N WHICH THE ASSESSEE IS PARTNER CANNOT BE ALLOWED UNDER SECTION 57(III) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY DISALLOWED THE SAME. ON APPEAL THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. AGGRIEVED BY THE IMPUGNED DECISION, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THIS GRO UND IN THE APPEAL BEFORE US. 9.2 HAVING HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES PERUSED THE MATER IAL ON RECORD ON THIS GROUND, IT IS OBSERVED THAT INTEREST INCOME SHOWN BY THE AS SESSEE IS FROM SAVINGS ONLY. THE INCOME EARNED UNDER THE HEAD OF OTHER SOURCE IS NOT ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN ETC ON WHICH INTEREST IS PAID. THE INTEREST OF RS.1,57,170 /- IS PAID TO A FIRM ON DEBIT BALANCE, HENCE THE DECISION OF THE LD.CIT(A) CONFIR MING THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 8 THE AO AS THE SAME IS NOT ALLOWABLE AS DEDUCTION IS THEREFORE UPHELD. ACCORDINGLY THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 10. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE. VI. ITA NO 1717/M/2012-RAVI H. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y.2002-03 11. AFTER NOTING THAT EXCEPT THE FACT THAT PRESENT ASSESSEE OWNS A DIFFERENT PROPERTY I.E., FLAT NO. 102, NCPA, NARIMAN POINT, M UMBAI WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM FLAT NO. 113, NCPA, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI INVOLVED IN TH E OTHER GROUP OF ASSESSEES CASE, THE ISSUE IS RAISED IN THE GROUNDS OF PRESENT APPEAL IS IDENTICAL TO THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN ITA NO. 1861/M/2012-REKHA T. VASWANI FO R THE A.Y. 2002-03. IN VIEW OF THAT MATTER, FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE ADJUDICA TION OF THE APPEAL IN ITA NO. 1861/M/2012-REKHA T. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y. 2002-03 A S AFOREMENTIONED FROM PARA 2 TO 2.3 OF THIS ORDER, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. VII. ITA NO 1707/M/2012-JANAK H. VASWANI FOR THE A.Y.2002-0 3 12. IT IS OBSERVED THAT THERE IS A DELAY OF 395 DAY S IN FILING THIS PRESENT APPEAL. HOWEVER, AFTER CONDONING THE SAID DELAY IN THE INTE REST OF JUSTICE, IT IS NOTED THAT THE PRESENT ASSESSEE IS A CO-OWNER ALONG WITH RAVI H. V ASWANI AS AFOREMENTIONED IN PARA 11 OF THIS ORDER, CONSIDERING SIMILAR ISSUE IS INVOLVED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, FOR THE REASONS STATED IN THE SAID PARA, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS DAY O F 13 TH SEPTEMBER, 2013. SD/- SD/- (R. S. SYAL) (DR. S.T.M. PAVALAN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 13.09.2013. *SRIVASTAVA ITA NO. 1861/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1862/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 658/MUM/2010 ITA NO. 1863/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 954/MUM/2009 ITA NO. 1717/MUM/2012 ITA NO. 1707/MUM/2012 REKHA T. VASWANI, TIKAM VASWANI, SUSHIL T. VASWANI RAVI H. VASWANI, JANAK H. VASWANI ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2004-05 9 COPY TO: THE APPELLANT THE RESPONDENT THE CIT, CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI THE DR D BENCH //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI.