SHAILAJA S. HEMDEV,MUMBAI vs. JCIT RG 19(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 531/MUM/2015Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 June 2017AY 2011-122 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that maintenance charges are deductible while computing the annual letting value under the head 'income from house property'. This decision was based on several judicial pronouncements, including those from the Delhi High Court and coordinate benches.

What were the facts?

The assessee, an individual and partner in a firm, declared income of Rs. 1.45 crores. The Assessing Officer determined the income at Rs. 1.57 crores. The primary dispute concerned the deduction of maintenance charges for let-out properties while computing income from house property.

What were the issues?

The main issue was whether maintenance charges for let-out properties are deductible when calculating income under the head 'income from house property'.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 23(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(5)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.

Order u/s.254(1)of the Income-tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद�य लेखा लेखा सद�य सद�य राजे�� सद�य राजे�� राजे�� केकेकेके अनुसार राजे�� अनुसार अनुसार PER RAJENDRA, AM- अनुसार Challenging the order,dated 16.12.2014,of the CIT(A)-34 Mumbai the Assessee has filed the present appeal .Assessee,an individual,is a partner in M/s. Access International. He filed his return of income on 30.09.2011,declaring total income at Rs.1.45 crores. The Assessing officer (AO) completed the assessment on 21/02/2014, u/s.143(3) of the Act,determining its income at Rs.1.57 crores.The only effective ground raised

by the assessee is the claim for deduction of maintenance charges (Rs.1.78 lakhs + Rs.5.64 lakhs +Rs.70.717/-) in respect of let out properties while computing income under the head ‘income from house property’. It was brought to our notice that identical issue was decided by the Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide order dt.24/6/15(ITA/55/Mum/2014 ). We are reproducing the facts of the case and the operative part of the order and it reads as under:- “2. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual and a partner in Access International. During the course of scrutiny assessment, the AO found that assessee has not taken ALV of flat situated in Peace Heaven Housing Cooperative Society Ltd. Accordingly, he computed the ALV, wherein he has taken highest range rent obtained from the society. In appeal, the additional made by the AO was confirmed by the CIT(A), against which assessee is in further appeal before us.

3. It was contended by ld. AR that on the principle of provisions of Section 23(2), the AO should not have taken the ALV of one house out of various houses owned by the assessee. As an alternate he submitted that the Municipal ratable value of the said flat should be taken as ALV instead of rent of other flats adopted by the AO.

4. We have considered rival contentions and found that assessee has offered income from house property in respect of four flats. However, no ALV was offered in respect of house situated in Peace Heave Housing Cooperative Society Ltd.. As per provisions of Section 23(2), a house or part of the house

531/M/15(11-12) Shailaja Sunil Hemdev

More judgments on Section 23(2)

All 58 judgments and leading authorities on Section 23(2) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →