Mr. Yusufali Bohra, Indore V. The ACIT, 3(1), Indore

ITA 472/IND/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 47222714 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-07-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ARUN DIWAN
• Assessee Lawyers: D J DAVE; ND DAVE

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI R.C. SHARMA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.472/IND/2010 AY: 2007-08 YUSUFALI BOHRA INDORE PAN AITPB-8276E ..APPELLANT V/S. ASSTT. CIT, 3(1) INDORE ..RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : S/SHRI D.J. DAVE AND ND DAVE RESPONDENT BY : SHRI ARUN DIWAN, SR. DR O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A GAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (AP PEALS) DATED 22.3.2010 ON THE GROUND THAT LEARNED COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WAS NOT JUSTIFIED IN CONFIRMIN G THE ORDER 2 OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER ENHANCING THE TAXABLE INCO ME OF THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE LEARNED FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY HAS ADVERTED TO THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE ALONG WITH THE REPORT O F THE INSPECTOR AND MADE SIMPLY UNWARRANTED OBSERVATION I N PARA 4.2 OF THE IMPUGNED ORDER. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED TO PAGE 8 OF THE PAPER BOOK WHICH IS THE ORDER 24.9.19 85 OF THE DISTRICT JUDGE. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LEARNED SR . DR DEFENDED THE IMPUGNED ORDER. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTI ES. THE FACTS, IN BRIEF, ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE DERIVES INCO ME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY AND OTHER SOURCES FROM WHICH INCOME AT RS. 11,12,130/- WAS DECLARED. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, H OWEVER, ON THE BASIS OF LOCAL ENQUIRY MADE THROUGH THE INSPECT OR, MADE ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF HOUSE PROPERTY INCOME. FEL T AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LEARNED COM MISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) WITH THE SUBMISSION THAT TH E FAIR RENT 3 OF THE PROPERTY CANNOT EXCEED STANDARD RENT FIXED A ND IF NOT FIXED, IT IS DETERMINABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF S ECTION 7 OF MADHYA PRADESH AND CHHATTISGARH GARH RENT ACCOMMODA TION CONTROL ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE RELIED ON THE DECIS IONS IN THE CASES OF DEWAN DAULAT RAI KAPOOR V. NMDC (1980) 122 ITR 700 (SC) AND CIT V. SHIVRAJ SINGH (MK) (1991) 192 I TR 120 (GUJ). THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APP EALS), HOWEVER, DID NOT AGREE WITH THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONFIRMED THE ADDITION MADE BY THE ASSESSING OF FICER. NOW THE ASSESSEE IS BEFORE US. IF THE TOTALITY OF FACTS AND THE ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE LEARNED RESPECTIVE COUNSE LS ARE ANALYSED, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE STANDARD RENT OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION HAS ALREADY BEEN FIXED AND, THEREFORE, THE ANNUAL VALUE, UNDER THE FACTS BEFORE US CANNOT EXCEED THE STANDARD RENT. IT IS FURTHER OBSERVED T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS OFFERED MORE RENT. THE CASES RELIED UP ON BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE RATIO LAID THEREIN FURTHER SUPPORT THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. AS PER THE ORDER DATED 24.9.1985 PASS ED BY THE 4 DISTRICT COURT, INDORE, ONLY STANDARD RENT AGREED B ETWEEN THE LANDLORD AND THE TENANT IS THE ACTUAL RENT UNDER TH E PROVISIONS OF THE M.P. ACCOMMODATION CONTROL ACT. WE, THEREFOR E, ALLOW THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND DELETE THE ADDITION , FINALLY, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28 TH JUNE, 2011. (R.C. SHARMA) (JOGINDER SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 28.6.2011 COPY TO: APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/CIT/CIT(A)/DR/GUARD F ILE DN/-