9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 264 - HC - Income TaxAnnual value determination - Fair rental value u/s 23(1)(a) - Municipal value or actual rent received Held that - It is an agreed position between the parties that the issue arising in the present case would stand governed by the decision of this Court in respondent assessee s case relating to Assessment Year 2005-06 decided in Commissioner of Income Tax 12 Vs. Tip Top Typography 2014 (8) TMI 356 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT . In the above view the impugned order of the Tribunal is quashed and set aside and restored to the Assessing Officer to decide the lis between the parties in respect of the questions raised herein. We direct the Assessing Officer to decide the dispute in accordance with the principles led down by this Court in Tip Top Typography (supra).
Issues:
Challenging common order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09. Analysis: The High Court was approached with two appeals challenging the common order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for the Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2008-09. The Revenue raised two questions of law for consideration. The first issue was whether the Tribunal was justified in not accepting the annual value determined by the Assessing Officer under Section 23(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The second issue questioned the Tribunal's decision on the annual value of the property specified in Section 23(1)(a), whether it should be the municipal rateable value or the actual rent received, and not the value determined based on comparable instances as adopted by the Assessing Officer. The parties agreed that the present case would be governed by a previous decision of the Court relating to Assessment Year 2005-06. The High Court, considering the agreed position between the parties and the precedent set in the previous case, quashed and set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal. The case was restored to the Assessing Officer for a decision on the questions raised, directing the Officer to follow the principles laid down by the Court in the previous case. The Court disposed of both appeals accordingly, with no order as to costs.
|
