TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 1084X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al for Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03 2003-04. The copies of all these orders have been placed before us and no contrary material or any higher Court s orders have been placed on record to show that such earlier orders of the Tribunal have been reversed by any higher forum. Therefore, following the precedents as citied above in assessee s own case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) on the issue and direct the deletion of disallowance. Disallowance of legal and professional fees - HELD THAT:- As following the order of the Tribunal in earlier assessment years as aforesaid in assessee s own case and on identical facts [ 2015 (8) TMI 38 - ITAT DELHI] , and [ 2010 (8) TMI 972 - ITAT DELHI] we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nil. The assessee s case was picked up for scrutiny. During the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee had shown gross rent from house property at ₹ 5,10,67,771/- and had claimed deduction for repairs at the rate 30% amounting to ₹ 1,53,20,331/-. The Assessing officer noted that the assessee had entered into a service agreement with Mitsui Company Ltd. vide agreement dated 29.10.1997 for letting out of a commercial center at Bangla Sahib Road, New Delhi. The Assessing Officer further noted that the agreement included service charges also and that the benefit of 30% of deduction was allowable only in respect of rental receipts. The Assessing Officer further noted that identical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) deleted the disallowance pertaining to depreciation. 2.2 Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT (A) now both the assessee as well as Department is in appeal before this Tribunal and the respective grounds raised by them are as under: Grounds of appeal by the assessee in ITA No.2695/Del/2016 1. The learned CIT (A) erred in law and on facts in confirming disallowance of 30% deduction for repairs u/s 24 amounting to ₹ 65,27,520/- on rental income received by the appellant by holding that the relevant income was service charges and not rent since there was a separate service agreement between the appellant and the tenant, while ignoring the lawful explanation of the appellant that the impugned service agreement was a part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... modify, alter, add or forego any ground of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal. 3.0 At the outset, the Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that all the disallowances are covered by the order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for earlier Assessment Years. He drew our attention to orders of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for earlier Assessment Years 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 and submitted that these issues were recurring issue and had been settled in favour of the assessee by the various orders of the Tribunal as aforesaid. 4.0 Per contra, the Ld. SR. Departmental Representative (DR) vehemently supported the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 27.06.2008. The copies of all these orders have been placed before us and no contrary material or any higher Court s orders have been placed on record to show that such earlier orders of the Tribunal have been reversed by any higher forum. Therefore, following the precedents as citied above in assessee s own case, we set aside the order of the Ld. CIT (A) on the issue and direct the deletion of disallowance amounting to ₹ 69,88,677/-. 5.1 Coming to the second issue under challenge by the assessee i.e., pertaining to disallowance of legal and professional fees, we note that this issue is also covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by orders of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for Assessment Years 2001-02 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
