TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 1763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pose of assessing income under the house property. Accordingly, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee against the revenue. - I.T.A. No. 430, 547/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2019 - E SHRI M. BALAGANESH AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JJ. Appellant by: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Respondent by: Shri D. G. Pansari ORDER AMARJIT SINGH, J. The assessee as well as revenue have filed the above mentioned appeals against the order dated 16.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the A.Y.2014-15. ITA NO. 547/M/2018 2. The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order dated 16.10.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... om house property to the tune of ₹ 33,57,314/- and income from other sources to the tune of ₹ 70,45,850/-. On verification, it was also found that the assessee has shown her flat at Central Garden Complex as vacant and has offered annual rental value of the flat as per the municipal ratable value at ₹ 15,77,192/-. Notice was given and after the reply of the assessee, the AO took the annual ratable value on the basis of the report of Inspector dated 23.12.2010 based upon the market rate to the tune of ₹ 2,96,57,575/-. Accordingly, the income of the assessee was assessed in sum of ₹ 2,99,34,430/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) considered the ratable value ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unicipal ratable value by municipal authorities in A.Y. 2006-07 as increased by 5% every year. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) following the order of his predecessor in A.Y. 2010-11 took the ALV at ₹ 17,03,369/- and finally the determined the current ALV at ₹ 20,81,895/- after making necessary adjustments for the annual increase. Thus the dispute before us is only with regard to the ascertainment of ALV where the flat was vacant during the year. In the case of DCIT vs. Laxmi Jain in ITA No.2118/M/2012 A.Y. 2009-10 the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal by following the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Smitaben N. Ambani vs. CWT, 323 ITR 104 High Court held that the ALV of the vacant flat has to be made on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mi Jain has been upheld by Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in ITA. No.1285/M/2015 dated 16.04.2018. In the case of Harsh Jain Vs. DCIT in ITA. No.2710/M/2013 for the A.Y. 2009-10 dated 05.02.2019. The coordinate bench has taken the similar view in which the municipal ratable value has taken into consideration for the deemed income from the house property. The said decision has also been upheld by Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Harsh Jain in ITA. No.1438 of 2016 for the A.Y. 2009-10. This issue has been squarely covered by Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court, therefore, in view of the said circumstances, we are of the view that the ALV of the vacant flat has to be determined on the basis of municipal ratable value for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
