VISTASP F BANAJI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 12(2), MUMBAI

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-23, Mumbai dated 4.12.2013 pertaining to assessment year 2009-10.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO for determining the annual value of the residential property u/s. 23(4) of the Act. It is the claim of the assessee that the annual value of the property has to be taken as Nil.

At the very outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee drew our attention to the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports Pvt. Ltd., in for A.Y. 2007-08 and 110 ITD 158. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that facts in issues in the present appeal are squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the Tribunal. It is the say of the Ld. Counsel that the assessee had made efforts to let out the property. To substantiate the claim, the Ld. Counsel drew our attention to the letter dated 8.9.2008 from Harsh Homes. The Ld. Counsel pleaded that since this letter was not before the lower authorities, therefore, this additional evidence should be accepted as it goes to the root of the matter.

We have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the decision of the Tribunal Mumbai Bench in the case of Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. 110 ITD 158. We have also perused the contents of the letter of Harsh Homes . We find force in the contention of the Ld. Counsel. Prima facie it appears that the assessee did made efforts to let out the property.

In the interest of justice and fair play, we restore this issue to the file of the AO. The AO is directed to decide the issue afresh after considering the letter of Harsh Homes in the light of the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports (supra).

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose.