ASST CIT CEN CIR 20, MUMBAI V. EVEREST KANTO INVESTMENT & FINANCE LTD, MUMBAI

ITA 24/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 83710 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 8 month(s) 16 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 01-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NIEL PHILIP

Judgement Text

, , , , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES E, MUMBAI .., ! , ' , # BEFORE SHRI I.P.BANSAL, JM AND SHRI RAJENDRA, AM ITA NO.24 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009-10) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX, CEN.CIR.-20, ROOM NO.402, 4 TH FLOOR, AAYKAR BHAVAN, MK ROAD, MUMBAI 20. M/S. EVEREST KANTO INVESTMENT & FINANCE LTD., 501, RAHEJA CENTRE, FREE PRESS JOURNAL MARG, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI 400021 PAN:AAACE 4794L ( $% / // / APPELLANT) ' ' ' ' / VS. ( ()$%/ RESPONDENT) $% * + * + * + * + /APPELLANT BY : SHRI NIEL PHILIP ()$% * + * + * + * + /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHEKHAR GUPTA ' * ,-' / / / / DATE OF HEARING : 18.09.2014 ./0 * ,-' / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.09.2014 1 1 1 1 / / / / O R D E R PER I.P.BANSAL (JM) : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE. IT IS DIR ECTED AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY LD. CIT(A)-39, MUMBAI DATED 04/10/2012 FO R ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. GROUNDS OF APPEAL READ AS UNDER: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DELETE THE ADDITION MADE TO THE ASSESSEES INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT IN T HIS CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS CORRECT IN TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE HIGHER SECUR ITY DEPOSIT TAKEN BY ASSESSEE, WHILE CALCULATING THE ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IN VIEW OF THE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS OF SECTION 23(1)(A) OF THE I.T. ACT. 3. THE APPELLANT CRAVES TO LEAVE TO ADD, TO AMEND A ND / OR TO ALTER ANY OF THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL, IF NEED BE. 4. THE APPELLANT, THEREFORE, PRAYS THAT ON THE GROU NDS STATED ABOVE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-39, MUMBAI MAY BE SET ASIDE AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER RESTORED. ITA NO.24 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009-10) 2 2. AT THE OUTSET IT WAS SUBMITTED BY LD. AR THAT TH IS ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y 2008-09. TO SUPPORT SUCH CONTENTION COPY OF OR DER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 4/9/2013 IN ITA NO.926/MUM/2012 WAS FURNISHE D ON OUR RECORD AND WAS ALSO GIVEN TO LD. DR. AFTER GOING THROUGH THE ORDER LD. DR ADMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE AFOREMENT IONED DECISION. RELEVANT PORTION OF THE DECISION IS REPRODUCED BELOW: 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISING OUT OF THE GROUNDS OF A PPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS PERTAINING TO THE CALCULATION OF THE ANNUAL VALU E OF THE PROPERTY U/S. 23(1)(A) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. AT THE OUTSET, IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THAT THE LD. CIT(A), IN THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, PRO VIDED THE RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY DIRECTING THE AO TO DELETE THE IMPUGNED ADDITION MADE HIM BY RELYING ON THE ORDER OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2001-02 TO 2006-07. THE RELEVANT FINDINGS OF THE DECISION OF ITAT ARE EXTRACTED HEREUNDER: IN OUR OPINION, THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT CASE THUS IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF THI S TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF RECLAMATION REALTY INDIA P. LTD. (SUPRA) W HICH IN TURN HAS RELIED ON AND FOLLOWED THE JUDGMENTS OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT AND JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT ON A SIMILAR ISSUE AND R ESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE SAID JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS, WE REVERSE THE IM PUGNED ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE AO TO A DOPT THE RENT ACTUALLY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE DURING A.Y 2003-04 TO 2006 -07 AS ANNUAL VALUE OF THE PROPERTY BEING MORE THAN THE MUNICIPAL RATEABLE VALUE. THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE AO AND CONFIRMED BY LD. C IT(A) ON THIS ISSUE ARE ACCORDINGLY DELETED ALLOWING GROUND NO.2 OF THE ASSESSEES APPEAL FOR A.Y. 2003-04 TO 2006-07. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONTRARY FACTS BROUGHT ON REC ORD BY THE REVENUE FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CORRECTLY RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ITA T IN DELETING THE IMPUGNED ADDITION. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY JUSTIFIABL E REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE DECISION OF THE LD. CIT(A) AND THE SAME IS UPHE LD. 3. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE SITUATION, AFTER HEARING BOT H THE PARTIES, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE AFOREMENTIONED DE CISION OF THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS ALSO SEEN THAT LD. CIT(A) HAS ALSO GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN RESPECT OF ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 TO 2006-07, WHICH HAS BEEN FOLLOWED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. THEREFORE, WE DISMISS THE REVENUES APPEAL. ITA NO.24 /MUM/2013 (A.Y. 2009-10) 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 18.09. 2 014. 1 * ./0 2'3 18.09.2014 / * : SD/- SD/- (RAJENDRA) (I.P.BANSAL) ' ' ' ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI; 2' DATED : 18 TH SEPT. 2014. VM. 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0, 1 * (,; < ;0,/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. $% / THE APPELLANT 2. ()$% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. =() / THE CIT, MUMBAI. 4. = / CIT(A)-13, MUMBAI 5. ;@: (,' , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. :A B / GUARD FILE. 1' 1' 1' 1' / BY ORDER, );, (, //TRUE COPY// C CC C/ // /D D D D (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , , , , / ITAT, MUMBAI