Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 495 - AT - Income TaxContribution receipts of sinking fund from the tenants - liable to be brought to tax as the income of the assessee under head income from house property - Held that:- As relying on case Mukesh D. Ambani vs. ACIT [2005 (4) TMI 529 - ITAT MUMBAI] contributions of the tenants of the property towards sinking fund cannot be assessed as rental income of the assessee. We thus finding no reason to take a different view, therefore, uphold the deletion of the addition on the said count by the CIT(A). - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of the claim of the assessee in respect of interest expenditure u/s 24(b) - Held that:- A.O while framing the assessment was not oblivious of the fact that the identical issue was decided by the CIT(A) in the assessee's own case for the immediately preceding year, viz. A.Y 2010-11, but however, had disallowed the claim of deduction of interest expenditure of ₹ 33,10,656/- raised by the assessee u/s 24(b), only for the reason that the revenue had not accepted the order of the CIT(A) on the issue under consideration in the preceding year, viz. A.Y 2010-11 and had assailed the same before the Tribunal. Deliberated on the facts and are unable to comprehend that now when the similar issue involving identical facts had been adjudicated by the CIT(A) in favour of the assessee, therefore, how a contrary view could have been taken by the A.O, despite remaining well convesant of the aforesaid state of affairs. As persuade ourselves to accept the view taken by the A.O for disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 24(b), therein leading to a consequential addition of ₹ 33,10,656/- in its hands. We had deliberated on the observations of the CIT(A) and are persuaded to be in agreement with the view taken by him. Notional interest in respect of interest free refundable deposits received by the assessee from its tenants - Held that:- In the case of CIT Vs. J.K. Investors (Bom) Ltd. (2000 (6) TMI 9 - BOMBAY High Court) as observed that as the actual rent received or receivable by the assessee in respect of the aforesaid property was found to be in excess of the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to have been let out from year to year, and the ALV had been determined under Sec. 23(1)(b), therefore, no addition in respect of the notional interest was called for in the hands of the assessee. On the observations recorded by the CIT(A) and are persuaded to be in agreement with the view taken by him. As the CIT(A) had followed the view taken by his predecessor in the assessee’s own case for the immediately preceding year, viz. A.Y 2010-11, therefore, no infirmity emerges from his order. Nothing has been placed on record or averred before us which could persuade us to conclude that the view taken by the CIT(A) in the assessee own case for A.Y 2010-11 had been set aside by the higher appellate forums and thus no more holds the ground. We thus finding ourselves to be in agreement with the view taken by the CIT(A), therefore, uphold the deletion of the addition - Decided in favour of assessee.
|