ALLIED FINANCE P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3761/DEL/1994Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 March 2025AY 1990-91Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)4 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal restored the issue of the annual letting value of the house property back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication. The decision was based on municipal valuation, following previous orders and a High Court directive.

What were the facts?

The appeals concern the annual letting value (ALV) of a house property for multiple assessment years. This is a second round of proceedings before the tribunal, with the issue having been previously restored to the Assessing Officer and then to the High Court.

What were the issues?

The primary issue is the determination of the annual letting value (ALV) of a house property, specifically whether to adopt the municipal valuation.

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, DELHI BENCH: ‘F’ NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN

For Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.03.2025Pronounced: 19.03.2025

ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM Cases called twice. None appears at the assessee’s behest. We accordingly proceeded ex-parte against the assessee herein, M/s. Allied Finance Pvt. Ltd. 2. We advert to the first and foremost AY 1990-91 wherein the assessee and the Revenue have filed their respective cross-appeals & 4089/Del/1994 which are directed against the & 4089/Del/1994; 3277/Del/1996 & 1452/Del/1997 CIT(A)-VIII, New Delhi’s order dated 31.03.1994 in proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).

3.

It emerges during the course of hearing with the able assistance coming from the Revenue side that this is the “second” round of proceedings before us. The earlier learned coordinate bench’s order dated 17.07.2000 appears to have restored the instant sole issue between the parties i.e. annual letting value “ALV” of the house property in question, back to the Assessing Officer, as per the “Municipal Corporation” valuation. The matter thereafter travelled to hon’ble jurisdictional high court in the assessee’s tax appeal and 41/2001 which stand restored back to us vide their lordships order dated 04.08.2015 to be decided afresh along-with appeals arising in AYs 1988-89 and 1990.

4.

That being the case, we sought to ascertain the finality of proceedings in the instant issue in AY 1989-90. We are informed that the assessee owned 1/3rd share and this tribunal’s “C” Bench’s order (1998) 65 ITD 512 (Delhi) R.K.K.R. International (P.) Ltd. Vs. ACIT had restored the issue back to the Assessing Officer to adopt “municipal valuation”. And that both these assessees happened to 2 | P a g e & 4089/Del/1994; 3277/Del/1996 & 1452/Del/1997 be the co-owners in the very house -property. We thus reiterate our earlier first round order dated 17.07.2000 and restore the instant sole issue to the learned Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication in very terms as per law. This assessee’s appeal Revenue’s cross-appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in very terms.

5.

Same order to follow in the latter twin assessment years i.e AY 1992-93 and 1993-94 involving the assessee’s appeals and 1452/Del/1997 raising the very issue which are hereby restored back to the learned Assessing Officer in very terms.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →