ACIT CC 39, MUMBAI vs. SATYPAL JAIN, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3831/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 June 2018AY 2010-1118 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the ALV of vacant flats should be determined based on the municipal rateable value, consistent with previous orders and High Court decisions. It also found that the enhancement of the municipal rateable value by the appellate authority was without basis.

What were the facts?

The Revenue and the assessee filed cross-appeals against the order of the First Appellate Authority concerning the Annual Lettable Value (ALV) of vacant properties. The Revenue argued that the ALV should not be solely based on municipal rateable value, while the assessee challenged an addition made by increasing the municipal rateable value.

What were the issues?

Whether the Annual Lettable Value (ALV) of vacant properties should be determined based on municipal rateable value, and if an enhancement by the appellate authority is justified without proper material.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 23(1)(a)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(19)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 BENCHES, ‘E’ MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Respondent: Shri M.V. Rajguru-DR, Shri Rakesh Mohan
Hearing: 08/05/2018

आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant (Respective assessee) 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai, 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड� फाईल / Guard file.

More judgments on Section 23(1)(a)

All 272 judgments and leading authorities on Section 23(1)(a) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →