TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 1145X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so noted that in the cases of Shri Satyapal Jain (husband of the assessee) for A.Y. 2006-07 and other family members the amount is to be taxed u/s 23(1)(a) of the Act and would be rateable at municipal value. In view of this uncontroverted position, appeal of the assessee is allowed. - ITA NO.4726/Mum/2014, ITA NO.4831/Mum/2014 - - - Dated:- 4-2-2016 - Shri G.S. Pannu, Accountant Member and Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member Assessee by : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue by Shri G.N. Makwana O R D E R Per Joginder Singh (Judicial Member) The Revenue as well as assessee is in across appeal against the impugned order dated 24/03/2014 of assessment year 2010-11of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai. First, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s justified in holding that rateable value as determined by the municipal authorities shall be yard stick by following the order of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smitaben N. Ambani vs. CWT 323 ITR 104. By doing so, he has ignored the decision in the following cases wherein it has been held that the annual letting value as determined by the municipal authorities is only one of the facts and the same can be ignored if it does not reflect the true ALV. These decisions are: 1. ITO vs. Spearhead Properties (P) Ltd. 46 SOT 208 2. Tivoli Investment and Trading company Pvt Ltd vs. ACIT 130 ITD 521 3. ITO vs. Hansa motor works 46 SOT 160 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected the AO s method of computation of ALV of the said two properties and upheld the assessee s rateable value. For this, CIT(A) relied on various decisions including the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Smitaben N Ambani vs. CWT, 323 ITR 104 wherein it was held that rateable value of the properties determined by the Municipal Authorities shall be the yard stick. Aggrieved with the decision of the CIT (A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the above mentioned grounds. 5. During the proceedings before us, Ld DR relied on various decisions to state that the ALV as determined by the Municipal Authorities is only one of the factors and same can be ignored if it does not reflect the true ALV. Ld DR r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t creative Industrial Centre and flats at Central Garden Complex, as per municipal rateable value at ₹ 8,48,545/- and the same were shown as vacant. The ld. Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 23(1)(a) of the Act on the premise that the annual value of the property deemed to be the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let out from year to year, therefore, the municipal valuation is not binding upon the Department for determining the reasonable rent, by following the decision in ITO vs Makrupa Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. 108 ITD 95 (Bom.). The ld. Assessing Officer hold that the rateable value adopted by the assessee, as per municipal laws, is not reasonable within the meaning of section 23(1)(a) of the Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TR 59 (SC) xii. Pradip Ramanlal Seth vs UOI 204 ITR 866 (Guj.) xiii. Radhaswamy Satsang vs CIT 193 ITR 321 (SC) xiv. Aggarwal warehousing Leasing Ltd. 257 ITR 235 (MP) The sum and substance of the aforesaid judicial pronouncements is that on the basis of principle of judicial discipline, consistency has to be followed and once in a particular year, if any view is taken, in the absence of any contrary material, no contrary view is to be taken as finality to the litigation is also a principle which has to be followed. Before us, no contrary facts or any adverse material was brought on record by the Revenue, therefore, we find merit in the argument of the ld. counsel for the assessee, because, in the aforesaid order dated 26/11/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
