OMPRAKASH RAMSURAT YADAV,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- CIRCLE 24(1), MUMBAI

ITA 4870/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 March 2026AY 2015-16Bench: JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG (President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the principle of consistency is attracted as the facts are identical to previous assessment years and similar cases. The Tribunal noted that in previous years, the CIT(A) had accepted the Annual Letting Value (ALV) at 5% of the capital value, and for an identical property leased by a co-trustee, the AO had accepted the rent of Rs. 21,00,000.

What were the facts?

The appellant, a trustee of Tara Meera Education Trust, jointly owned office premises and leased them to the trust. Initially, the agreed rent was Rs. 36,00,000 per annum, but it was reduced to Rs. 21,00,000 per annum due to the trust's financial difficulties. The Assessing Officer added Rs. 15,00,000 to the appellant's income, being the difference between the originally agreed rent and the reduced rent.

What were the issues?

Whether the reduced rent should be accepted for determining the Annual Letting Value, and if the principle of consistency should be applied based on previous assessment years and similar cases.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 23(1)(b),Section 23(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC ”, MUMBAI

Before: JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV

For Appellant: Shri Aamod Prabhudesai
For Respondent: Shri Kiran K Chhatrapati Sr.DR
Hearing: 17/12/2025Pronounced: 04/03/2026

PER JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG, PRESIDENT :

By this appeal, the appellant assessee is challenging the order dated 26.06.2025 passed by the Addl/JCIT(A), Bhubaneswar (‘CIT(A)’ for short) which in turn arose out of the order dated 23.11.2017 passed by the Assessing Officer (‘AO’ for short) thereby, confirming the addition of Rs.15,00,000/- u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short). The appeal relates to A.Y.2015-16. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant is having 1/3rd share in the office premises No.601,701 and 901 situated at New Excel House, Andheri (W), Mumbai which are jointly owned by him alongwith other family members. The appellant happens to be one of the trust

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 23(1)(b)

All 51 judgments and leading authorities on Section 23(1)(b) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →