THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD vs. SMT. MAMTA RAJIVKUMAR AGARWAL, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1788/AHD/2019Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 November 2022AY 2013-143 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal clarified that the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, and consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. The assessee is entitled to the deduction for interest expenses under Section 24(b) as the interest-bearing fund was used for acquiring the house property.

What were the facts?

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) issued a corrigendum to its earlier order. The original order mistakenly stated that the assessee's appeal was allowed and the Revenue's appeal was dismissed.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction of interest expenses on a housing loan when the source of payment for the interest is known. The corrigendum clarifies the tribunal's decision on the Revenue's appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 24(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

In the above matter, the Tribunal has passed an Order dated 11/11/2022. However, it has come to the noticed that there are certain typographical errors crept in the order particularly at page no. 11 in para 17.1 and 18.

2.

The following typographical mistakes are noticed as under:

i. At Page No. 11 in para 17.1 in the last line of the order, it is inadvertently mentioned as “ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed”. In fact, it should be read as “ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed” ii. Similarly, at page no. 11 in the last concluding para 18 of the order, it is mentioned as “In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.” However, it should be read as “In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed”

3.

In view of the above, paragraphs should be read as under:

“17.1 On perusal of the above provisions, we note that there is no mention about the payment of the interest cost on the housing loan. In other words, it is not necessary to make the payment by the assessee on the money borrowed by him for acquiring the housing loan. What is necessary is this that the money should have been borrowed by the assessee for the purchase of the property on which the interest is payable. As far as, borrowing and the interest thereon is concerned, there is no dispute that the interest-bearing fund has been used by the assessee for acquiring the house property. Thus, to our understanding, the provisions of section 24(b) of the Act have been duly complied with as source of payment for the interest is known i.e. the husband of the assessee. Accordingly, we are of the view that the assessee cannot be denied the benefit of deduction with respect to the interest expenses provided under the provisions of section 24(b) of the Act. Hence, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

18.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.”

4.

Therefore, this Corrigendum is being issued to remove the above mistake and it is rectified as such.

Order pronounced in the Court on 29/11/2022 at Ahmedabad.

More judgments on Section 24(b)

All 545 judgments and leading authorities on Section 24(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →