SANDEEP HEMANT SHIRODKAR, MUMBAI V. ACIT 11(1), MUMBAI

ITA 778/MUM/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84223 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 9 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 10-11-2014
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 30-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LOVE KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: HITESH M SHAH

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH, M UMBAI BEFORE HONBLE S/SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO (JM) , AND B.R.BASKARAN (AM) , . . , ./I.T.A. NO.778/MUM/2013 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2009-10) SANDEEP HEMANT SHIRODKAR, BUNGALOW NO.7, EDEN BUNGALOW, OPP, HIRANANDANI FOUNDATION SCHOOL, HIRANANDANI, POWAI, MUMBAI-400076 / VS. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 11(1), 4 TH FLOOR, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI-400020 ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT) ./ ./ PAN/GIRNO.:AAKPS7762H ! / APPELLANT BY : SHRI HITESH M SHAH ' ! /RESPONDENT BY SHRI LOVE KUMAR # ' $% / DATE OF HEARING : 10.11.2014 &' ' $% /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.11.2014. / O R D E R PER B.R.BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINS T THE ORDER DATED 03- 12-2012 PASSED BY LD CIT(A)-3, MUMBAI AND IT RELATE S TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE DECISION OF LD CIT(A) IN CONFIRMING THE DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSE E U/S 24 OF THE ACT AGAINST THE PROPERTY INCOME. 2. THE FACTS RELATING TO THE SAME ARE STATED IN BRIEF. THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED INTEREST ON LOAN OF RS.1,50,000/- AS DEDUCTION U/S 24 OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE HOUSING LOAN TAKEN FROM FEDERAL BANK LTD FOR CONSTR UCTING SELF OCCUPIED HOUSE. THE CERTIFICATE OBTAINED FROM THE BANK SHOWED THAT THE HOUSING LOAN WAS IN THE NAME OF ASSESSEES WIFE NAMED SONALI SANDEEP SHIROD KAR. SINCE THE CERTIFICATE ITA NO.778/M/2013 2 MENTIONED THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEES WIFE, THE AO H ELD THAT THE CLAIM FOR DEDUCTION OF INTEREST IS NOT TENABLE AND ACCORDINGL Y DISALLOWED THE SAME. THE LD CIT(A) ALSO CONFIRMED THE SAID DISALLOWANCE, EVEN A FTER GIVING A FINDING THAT THE SANCTION LETTER OF THE SHOWS THE LOAN WAS GIVEN IN THE JOINT NAME OF ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEES WIFE. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 3. WE HEARD THE PARTIES AND PERUSED THE RECORD. WE NOTICE FROM THE SANCTION LETTER OF THE BANK, WHICH IS PLACED IN THE PAPER BOOK, THAT THE LOAN WAS GIVEN IN THE JOINT NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND HIS WIF E. THE TOTAL INTEREST PAID DURING THE YEAR WAS RS.3,60,431/-. THE LD A.R SUBM ITTED THAT THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF EMI ON THE HOUSING LOAN WAS PAID BY THE ASSESSEE FROM HIS BANK ACCOUNT. ACCORDINGLY HE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAI MED INTEREST OF RS.1,50,000/- U/S 24 OF THE ACT. THE LD A.R ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE WIFE OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY DEDUCTION U/S 24 OF THE ACT IN RESP ECT OF THE ABOVE SAID HOUSING LOAN. WE NOTICE THAT THE TAX AUTHORITIES HAVE DISA LLOWED THE CLAIM ONLY UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE LOAN WAS TAKEN BY ASSESSEES WI FE. HOWEVER, THE SAID INFERENCE IS PROVED TO BE WRONG IF ONE VIEWS THE SA NCTION LETTER ISSUED BY THE BANK, WHEREIN THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE AND ASSESSEE S WIFE FIND PLACE, MEANING THEREBY, THE LOAN HAS BEEN SANCTIONED IN TH E JOINT NAME. HENCE, IN OUR VIEW, THE ASSESSEE HEREIN IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM DEDU CTION U/S 24 OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF RS.1,50,000/- AS PRESCRIBED IN THAT SECTI ON IN RESPECT OF SELF OCCUPIED PROPERTIES. ACCORDINGLY, WE SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DIRECT THE AO TO ALLOW THE DEDUCTION OF INTEREST CL AIM OF RS.1,50,000/- MADE BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSES SEE IS ALLOWED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 14TH NOV, 2014 . &' # () * + 14TH NOV , 2014 ' ' , - SD SD ( / VIJAY PAL RAO ) ( . . ,/ B.R. BASKARAN ) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( # MUMBAI: 14TH NOV,2014. ITA NO.778/M/2013 3 . . ./ SRL , SR. PS !'# $#%! / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. # 0$ ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. # 0$ / CIT CONCERNED 5. 6. 1, $ 2 , % 2 , ( # / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED ,3 4 / GUARD FILE. 5 # / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY 6 (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) % 2 , ( # /ITAT, MUMBAI