MOHAN HOTCHAND KHANCHANDANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CEN CIR 36, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4349/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 December 2016AY 2010-112 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 found that the assessee was not in possession of the disputed property, which was taken over by the bank. Therefore, no income could be generated from it, and the addition of deemed rent was unjustified.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2010-11. One ground regarding low drawings was rendered infructuous as additions were deleted. The main issue concerned an addition for deemed rent of a disputed property.

What were the issues?

Whether deemed rent can be added to the income of an assessee for a property not in their possession and subject to legal disputes.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM Shri

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh D Jiwnani
For Respondent: Shri S.R. Kirtane
Hearing: 21/12/2016Pronounced: 21/12/2016

आदेश / 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) for the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In ground No.1, assessee is aggrieved for addition made on account of low drawings. It was submitted by learned AR that additional CIT has already given effect to the direction of CIT(A) and the additions have already been deleted. Accordingly Ground No.1 becomes infructuous. 3. In the Ground No.2, assessee is aggrieved for making addition on account of deemed rent of Rs.1,04,000/- in respect of flat in Kalian Kamal, Santacruz (east), Mumbai. We found that the said property is disputed property and assessee is not in possession of it, which has been taken over by the bank from whom predecessor vendor had taken loan on

Shri Mohan Hotchand Khanchandani mortgage of the said flat. We also found that assessee has filed case in regard to this property in the Court of Law. Accordingly, there was no income from this house property. 4. Keeping in view the totality in facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any merit for the addition of deemed rent. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →