SALIM ABUBAKER V. ASSISTANT COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX VAPI CIRCLE

TAXAP/1183/2018

AI Insights

Salim Abubaker, the appellant, challenged the judgments of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad, concerning the assessment of his income tax for the assessment year 2008-2009. The primary issues revolved around the assessment of notional rental income from a property and the clubbing of income from family members into the appellant's income. The Tribunal and CIT (A) had confirmed the Assessing Officer's decisions, which led to the appeal in the High Court. The High Court found no error in the lower authorities' decisions and dismissed the appeal, stating that no substantial question of law was involved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 769686 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 08-10-2018
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: NIKUNT RAVAL
• Assessee Lawyers: B S SOPARKAR
• Keywords: Annual letting value; Assessment; Clubbing of Income; Income Tax; Notional rental income
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

"C/TAXAP/1183/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL No. 1183 of 2018 ============================================================= SALIM ABUBAKER Versus ASSISTANT COMMISSONER OF INCOME TAX VAPI CIRCLE ============================================================= Appearance : Mr B S SOPARKAR, Advocate for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 Mr NIKUNT RAVAL for Mrs. KALPANAK RAVAL for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ============================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA 8th October 2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) This Appeal is filed by the assessee challenging the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad [“Tribunal” for short], raising the following questions for our consideration : [A] “Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in confirming the order of the CIT [A] and the Assessing Officer wherein for the let of house properties, the ALV arrived at is unrealistically high and without any material basis ?” Page 1 of 3 C/TAXAP/1183/2018 ORDER [B] “Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in confirming the order of the CIT [A] holding that the appellant had failed to produce any cogent evidence to prove that the value of the property was lower than the one determined by the Assessing Officer ?” [C] “Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in confirming the order of the CIT [A] holding that the income from various properties which were shown in the return of the income of the family members of the appellant belong to the appellant ?” [D] “Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts in taxing the same income twice; in the hands of the family members as well as in the hands of the appellant ?” The appellant assessee is an individual. For AY 2008-2009, the assessee had filed return of income on 4th September 2008 declaring total come at Rs. 9,20,250/=. During the course of Page 2 of 3 C/TAXAP/1183/2018 ORDER assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer made additions on various counts and assessed the assessee’s total income at Rs. 2.24 Crores [rounded off]. Assessee carried the matter in appeal. CIT [A] gave substantial relief, however, confirmed the additions on two counts viz., [a] Tax on the notional rental income on a plot of land with farm house situated thereon, the Assessing Officer had assessed the annual letting value of the property and demanded tax consequently. CIT [A] confirmed the same. The Tribunal also accepted this position. [ii] The second issue was of clubbing the income of the family members. Assessee had contended that the income was generated out of the investments made by the assessee, but on which, the assessee’s family members had also paid tax. The CIT [A] and the Tribunal confirmed the assessment of such income in the hands of the assessee. In the facts of the case, we do not find any error in the view taken by CIT [A] and the Tribunal in relation to these issues. No question of law arises. Tax Appeal is dismissed. [Akil Kureshi, J.] [B.N Karia, J.] Prakash Page 3 of 3 "