Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “G”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR
ITA No. : 4247/Mum/2013 (Assessment year: 2010-11) Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs G N M Realtors Pvt Ltd, CC-22 & 30, 204, Raheja Centre, Free Press Central Range -5, Journal Marg, 214, Nariman Point, Room No. 404, 4th Floor, Mumbai -400 021 �थयी लेखा सं.:PAN: AABCG 4937 E Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai- 400 020 अपीलाथ� (Appellant) ��यथ� (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Abani Kanta Nayak : Respondent by : Shri Shekhar Gupta सुनवाई क� तार�ख /Date of Hearing : 17-11-2015 घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of Pronouncement : 17-11-2015 आदेश ORDER अिमत शु�ला, �या. स.: PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM: The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the revenue against impugned order dated 12.03.2013 passed by CIT(A) -39, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for the assessment year 2010-11 on the following sole effective ground :-
That on the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 47,50,000/- to the Annual Letting Value of the flat let out by the assessee at monthly rent of Rs. 50,000/- and obtaining interest free security deposit of Rs. 5 crores whereas the said flat had earlier been let out at monthly rent of Rs. 2,00,000/- and interest free deposit of Rs. 3 crores 2 G N M Realtors Pvt Ltd
At the outset, the Ld. Counsel submitted that here in this case, the Ld. CIT(A) has merely remanded the matter to the AO for determination of Annual Letting Value u/s 23(1)(a) and after taking into consideration the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Moni Kumar Subba, reported in 333 ITR 330.
Ld. DR on the other hand, also admitted that addition has not been deleted by the CIT(A) but the matter has been remanded back to the AO.
After considering the aforesaid contention and on perusal of the impugned order, we find that the ground raised by the revenue is misconceived, as the Ld. CIT(A) has not deleted the addition but has remanded the matter to the AO to determine the Annual Letting Value (ALV) and to take into consideration the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Moni Kumar Subba (supra). Before us it has been pointed out that now the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography, reported in 368 ITR 330, the Hon’ble Court has given very detailed guidelines after considering the said decision of the Delhi High Court. Accordingly, we reiterate the direction of the CIT(A) for determination of ALV, however, with a direction that AO should determined the ALV in accordance with the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). Accordingly, ground raised by the revenue stands dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 17th November, 2015.
Sd/- Sd/- (रिमत कोचर) (अिमत शु�ला) लेखा सद�य �याईक सद�य (RAMIT KOCHAR) (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Date: 17th November, 2015 3 G N M Realtors Pvt Ltd 1) अपीलाथ� /The Appellant. 2) ��यथ� /The Respondent. 3) The CIT(A) -39, Mumbai. 4) The CIT Central – II, Mumbai. 5) िवभागीय �ितिनिध “G”, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई/ The D.R. “G” Bench, Mumbai. 6) गाड� फाईल \ Copy to Guard File. आदेशानुसार/By Order / / True Copy / /