ABDUL AZIZ LOKHANDWALA, MUMBAI V. ITO 5(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 2868/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: 286819914 RSA 2013
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 22-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 12-04-2013
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Salary income; Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 80C

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 2868 /MUM/201 3 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2009 - 10) ABDUL AZIZ LOKHANDWALA B/2102, LADY RATAN TOWERS PINIK SHIVNER ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR, WORLI, MUMBAI - 400018. VS.` ITO 5(1)(1) MUMBAI. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ORDER PER G.S. PANNU , AM THE CAPTIONED APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE CIT(A)) DATED 14.01.2013, WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER U/S. 143 (3 ) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ACT) DATED 26 .12.2011, PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 - 10 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED TWO ISSUES MAINLY , I.E. DENIAL OF DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF INTEREST PAID ON HOUSING LOAN OF RS. 1.18 LACS WHILE REVENUE BY SHRI S.V. NAVALKAR ASSESSEE BY SHRI VIKRAM BATRA DATE OF HEARING 2 2 .07.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 31 .08.2015 2 ITA NO 2868/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2009 - 10) PAGE 2 OF 4 COMPUTING INCOME UNDER THE HEAD HOUSE PROPERTY AND DENIAL OF DEDUCTION U/S 80C OF THE ACT FOR RS. 1,50,000/ - RESPECTIVELY. 3. BRIEFLY PUT , THE RELEVANT FACTS ARE THAT ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO FILED HIS RETURN OF INCOME ON 26/12/2010 DECLARING INCOME UNDER THE HEAD SALARY AND HOUSE PROPERTY . THE ASSESSEE HAD DECLARED A TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 3 , 22,900 / - WHICH INCLUD ED A GROSS SALARY INCOME OF R S . 5,87,900 / - AGAINST WHICH A TOTAL DEDUCTION OF RS. 1,15,000/ - WAS CLAIMED U/S 80C AND 80D OF THE ACT . APART THERE FROM , INTEREST PAID ON HOUSING LOAN AMOUNTING TO RS. 1,50,000 / - WAS CLAIMED AS A LO SS UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUS E PROPERTY WHICH WAS SET - OFF AGAINST THE SALARY INCOME. 4. THE ASSESSING OFFICER AS WELL AS THE CIT ( A) HAVE DENIED THE ABOVE CLAIM S OF THE ASSESSEE AND INSTEAD THE TOTAL INCOME HAS BEEN DETERMINED AT RS. 5,87,900/ - REPR ESENTING GROSS SALARY INCOME. 5. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE ASSESSEE APPEARED IN PERSON AND POINTED OUT THAT HE HAS AVAILED A HOUSING LOAN FROM J&K BANK LIMITED AND BY REFERRING TO A CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE BANK DATED 01.03.2012, IT IS CONTENDED THAT TOTAL INSTALLMENT PAID AMOUNT TO RS. 5,64,000/ - AND INTEREST CHARGED FOR THE PERIOD STAND S AT RS. 4,22,309/ - . THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO REFERRED TO A SALE AGREEMENT IN TER MS OF WHICH HE HAS PURCHASED A RESIDENTIAL FLAT AT ROYAL PALMS IN BORIVALI, MUMBAI, FOR WHICH THE HOUSING LOAN HAS BEEN AVAILED FROM J&K BANK. SIMILARLY, IT IS CONTENDED THAT THE CLAIM U/S 80C OF THE ACT HAS BEEN MADE WITH RESPECT TO THE REPAYMENT OF HOUS ING LOAN AND PREMIUM PAID TO LIC FOR WHICH THE RELEVANT PAPERS HAVE ALSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD . W ITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U /S 80D OF THE ACT OF RS. 15,000/ - , A RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE NEW 3 ITA NO 2868/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2009 - 10) PAGE 3 OF 4 INDIA INSURANCE COMPAN Y LTD. FOR THE RELEVANT PERIOD HAS A LSO BEEN PLACED ON RECORD. 6. WE FIND THAT THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE DENIED THE CLAIM OF ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MATERIAL REFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THAT HE WOULD BE SATISFIED IF THE MATTER IS RESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER WITH DIRECTION TO EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE ON RECORD AND ALLOW THE CLAIMS, AS PER LAW. 7. THE LD. DR APPEARING FOR THE REVENUE HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE AFORES AID PRAYER OF THE ASSESSEE. 8. IN THE ABOVE BACKGROUND, WE HEREBY RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF ASSESSING OFFICER, WHO SHALL EXAMINE THE MATERIAL BEING RELIED UPON BY THE ASSESSEE AND, THEREAFTER, ALLOW THE CLAIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. NEEDLESS TO SAY, THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL ALLOW THE ASSESSEE A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD BEFORE PASSING AN ORDER AFRESH AS PER LAW. 9 . IN THE RESULT , APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED AS ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 31 ST DAY OF AUGUST 2015. SD/ - SD/ - ( SANJAY GARG ) (G.S. PANNU) (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ) MUMBAI DATED 31 - 08 - 2015 SKS SR. P.S, 4 ITA NO 2868/MUM/2013 ASSESSMENT YEAR: - 2009 - 10) PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CONCERNED CIT(A) 4. THE CONCERNED CIT 5. THE DR, J BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI