MUKESH CHOKSI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 46, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4163/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 November 2019AY 2011-123 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the assessee provided a bank certificate indicating payments, but it was a projection of repayment. Since these documents were submitted for the first time, the matter was restored to the AO for fresh consideration.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerned the disallowance of interest on a housing loan, municipal taxes, and a deduction for housing loan repayment. The Assessing Officer (AO) had disallowed these claims due to a lack of documentary evidence.

What were the issues?

Whether the AO should have considered documentary evidence submitted for the first time before the Tribunal, and whether the claims for interest, taxes, and loan repayment were allowable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Choksi
For Respondent: Shri Akthar H Ansari
Hearing: 06/11/2019Pronounced: 13/11/2019

O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 22, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)-22/IT/162/2015-16 dated 05/04/2018 for the A.Y.2011-12 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

2.

The grievance of assessee relates to disallowance of interest on housing loan amounting to Rs.10,07,688/- and municipal taxes of Rs.1,15,691/-. The assessee is also aggrieved for deduction of repayment of housing loan amounting to Rs.62,151/-.

3.

I have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that these claims were declined by the AO because documentary evidences were not filed before him. However, before me, the assessee has filed a certificate of bank dated 08/01/2014 indicating the payment of interest and principle amount. However, I observe that this certificate indicates “projection of repayment”. Since, these are documents placed before me for the first time, in all fairness, I restore the matter back to the file of the AO for deciding afresh after considering these documents and giving due opportunity to the assessee.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 13/11/2019.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →