TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 740X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Annual Value of the property as determined by the assessee in his return of income. Factually speaking, it is quite clear that the Municipal Ratable Value of the property is lower than the actual rent received by the assessee and in fact the actual rent received is almost seven times the Municipal Ratable Value. This aspect of the matter, in our view, signifies that the actual rent derived by the assessee is quite reasonable. It is also evident that in case of Shri. Manishi Ranbir Maker (supra) the issue before the Tribunal related to the determination of Annual Value of the property located in the same building as that of the assessee before us. In the case of Shri. Manishi Ranbir Maker (supra) the property was admeasuring an area of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ranbir Maker, (i. E. ITA No.7340/Mum/2011) is taken as the lead case. This appeal is directed against the impugned appellate order dated 10/08/2011 passed by CIT(A)-41, Mumbai pertaining to the assessment year 2008- 09, with reference to the assessment order dated 16/11/2010, passed in terms of section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 ( in short the Act ). 3. Briefly put the relevant facts are that assessee is owning 3/4th share in Flat No.151/152 at Maker Tower L , Cuffe Parade, Mumbai 400 005, which was rented out to one M/s. Robo India Finance Pvt. Ltd. for an yearly rent of ₹ 1,80,000/-. On the basis of the actual rent received, assessee declared income from house property at ₹ 94,500/- after claiming statutory deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act. The assessee pointed out that as per provisions of section 23(1) of the Act, for the purposes of determination of Annual Value, the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to be let from year to year or actual rent received, whichever is higher is to be considered. The assessee pointed out that the annual ratable value determined by the local Municipal Corporation was ₹ 25,477/-, which was lower than the actual rent received and; therefore, the income declared by the assessee based on the Annual Value equivalent to the actual rent received was quite justified. The CIT(A) considered the submissions put forth by the assessee and by relying on the decision of the Tribunal,in the case of ITO vs. Sahar Developers, ITA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ranbir Maker vide ITA No.7341/Mum/2011 ITA No.4405/Mum/2012 for assessment years 2008-09 and 2009-10 order dated 30/8/2013 to point out that CIT(A) made no mistake in upholding the Annual Value of the property as returned by the assessee. Ld. Representative for the assessee pointed out that in the case Shri Manish Ranbir Maker (supra) also, the property was located in the same building as that of the assessee and in that case also the Assessing Officer had relied on the rent derived by Mr. Puneet R. Gupta. It was pointed out that the Tribunal considered the circumstances in which Mr. Puneet R. Gupta was earning rent of ₹ 3.00 lacs per month and found that the same could not be considered as a rent for which the property can be reaso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing Officer has considered by the Tribunal in the case of Shri Manish Ranbir Maker (supra) for the assessment year 2008-09, which is also the year under consideration before us. The Tribunal in its order dated 30/08/2013(supra) noted that in the case of Mr. Puneet R. Gupta, the property was let out by way of a leave and licence agreement on 11/5/2007 and prior to that the property was fetching a monthly rent of ₹ 10,000/- only as per an agreement dated 25/2/2004. The Tribunal considered that such a rental arrangement could not be compared with other rental arrangements which are being carried forward from the past years. In our considered opinion, the parity of reasoning which prevailed with the Tribunal in the case of Shri Manis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
