DLG BUILDERS PVT LTD,CHANDIGARH vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHANDIGARH
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that no prejudice would be caused to the Revenue by allowing the assessee an opportunity to demonstrate the nexus between the interest expenditure and the house property income. The issue was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed a disallowance of Rs. 24,27,995/- on account of interest paid on borrowings. The lower authorities denied this claim as the assessee could not establish the nexus between the interest payment and the property income assessed under 'income from house property'.
What were the issues?
Whether the interest paid on borrowings is allowable as a deduction against income from house property when the assessee fails to establish a direct nexus.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH BENCHES ‘A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & Ms. ANNAPURNA GUPTA
Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)]-2, Chandigarh dated 02.03.2016. The assessee has taken following ground of appeal:-
That on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Chandigarh has erred in law and facts in upholding disallowance Rs. 24,27,995/- on account of interest paid on borrowings u/s 24(b) of Act on technical ground though the amount claimed matches with the claim.
ITA No.457/Chd/2016- DLG Builders Pvt Ltd., Chandigarh 2
The only issue raised in this appeal is relating to the upholding
of disallowance of Rs. 24,27,995/- on account of interest paid on
borrowings u/s 24(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the amount of
interest was paid by the assessee on account of housing loan, rental
income relating to which was assessed by the lower authorities under
the head ‘income from house property’. The Ld. Counsel has
submitted that the aforesaid expenditure of interest was allowable u/s
24(b) of the Act. However, the lower authorities have denied the
claim of the assessee for the reason that the assessee could not
establish that the aforesaid payment of interest was relating to the
property, income for which has been assessed under the head ‘income
form house properly’. He has submitted that the lower authorities
have not appreciated the evidence filed by the assessee in this
respect. The Ld. Counsel has, therefore, submitted that he may be
given an opportunity to demonstrate before the Assessing officer
about the facts of housing loan and thereby incurring of interest
relating to the house property, income from which has been assessed
under the head ‘income from house property’.
The Ld. DR on the other hand has relied on the findings of the
lower authorities.
We have considered the rival submissions. Before us, the only
relief that the assessee has claimed that he may be allowed to
demonstrate before the lower authorities the nexus between the
interest expenditure and the income from the house property. In our
ITA No.457/Chd/2016- DLG Builders Pvt Ltd., Chandigarh 3
view, no prejudice will be caused to the Revenue if the assessee is
given an opportunity to appear and demonstrate true facts to the
Assessing officer on this issue. In view of this, the issue is restored
to the file of the Assessing officer for adjudication afresh. Needless
to say that the assessing officer will provide proper opportunity to
the assessee to present its case and thereafter will decide the issue in
accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for
statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Open Court
Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated :27.03.2018 Rkk
Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR
More judgments on Section 24(b)
- Sweta Somani, Kolkata vs ITO, Ward 44(2), KolkataITA 1656/KOL/2026[2015-2016]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2015-2016
- Dy. Commissioner of Income… vs Thomas Myladiyil Augustine, AhmedabadITA 1131/AHD/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Ronakkumar Dipakbhai Shah, Arvalli vs The ITO, Ward-1, ModasaITA 2631/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- ACIT, Circle 5(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs Vighnahara Properties Private Limited…ITA 3679/MUM/2026[2018]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026
- ACIT, Circle 5(2)(1), Mumbai vs Vighnahara Properties Private Limited…ITA 3678/MUM/2026[2017]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Shivam Tiles House vs. State Of U.P. And AnotherAllahabad · 21 Oct 2026
- Imtiyaz Shaikh Z Chorlekar vs. Salman ShaikhBombay · 21 Oct 2026
- Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Its Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr The Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University Thr Registrar Prashant S Amrutkar vs. Union Of INDIA Thr Secretary And OthersBombay · 19 Oct 2026
- Vinishma Technologies Private Limited vs. State Of KarnatakaKarnataka · 17 Oct 2026