CIT v. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd.

M/S. Alfa Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-26(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

…upation certificate and some of the flats were lying in stock on which assessee had not declared notional rent as income in its return. The AO relying on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Ansal Housing Finance and Leasing Company Limited reported in 354 ITR 180 made an addition of Rs. 15,12,847/- as deemed rent. 9. Assessee in appeal before the ld.CIT(A) inter-alia submitted that further amendment in section 23 is made by inserting subsection 5 w.e.f. 01.04.2018 and hence the same is not applicable to the appellant's case and therefore in the instant case addition made by the AO on unsold flats held as…

D.C.I.T.-15(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Haware Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

…r: 2014-15 Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative relied upon the assessment order and submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in not following decisions of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013) : 354 ITR 180 (Del). Ld. Departmental Representative also placed reliance on the recent decision of the Tribunal in the case of Dimple Enterprises Vs, DCIT: ITA No.5269/Mum/2019, dated 21.05.2021. Responding to the submission of the Ld. Departmental Representative the Ld. Authorized Representative for the Assessee, relying upon the „Object Clause‟ of the asses…

Pegases Properties P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT - CC-2(3), Mumbai

In the result the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

…s being given by the assessee in subsequent years also. 5.5. The ld. AO followed the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Ansal Housing & Construction (2016) (389 ITR 373) (Delhi) and CIT vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd (2013) (354 ITR 180) (Delhi) and Hon'ble Bombay High Court in case of Mangla Homes P Ltd (325 ITR 281) for determining the Annual Letting Value (ALV) of the unsold flats/units as per section 23 of the Act. The Ld. AO took the fair value of the rent which can be fetched in that area and considered Rs. 12 per Sq. Ft. Based on the same, the ld. AO applied the fair valu…

M/S. Artcia Construction, Mumbai vs. ACIT-29(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Blem/S. Aricia Construction V. Acit -29(1) 1501, 15Th Floor, B-Wing C-10, 1St Floor, Room No. 108 02 Commercial Complex Pratyakshkar Bhavan Opp. Asha Nagar, Mulund(W) Bandra Kurla Complex Mumbai-400080 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Aaofa9504F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Dilip Shah Department By : Shri Sanjay J. Sethi

…erein it was held that in respect of assets held as business, income from the same is not assessable u/s.23(1) of the IT Act. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd., 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) in support of the proposition that even in respect of unsold flats by the developer is liable to be taxed as income from house property. 5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the record. The issue under consideration has been restored by the CIT(A) to the file of AO to compute the annual value. Recently the Hon’ble Supreme C…

DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai vs. K Raheja Copr Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodk. Raheja Corporate Services Acit-14(2)(1), Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. C-30, G- Block, Opp. Sidbi, Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bandra, Mumbai-400 051 Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Pan: Aabcn 9309B Appellant Respondent K. Raheja Corporate Pvt. Ltd., Dcit- Central Circle 4(2), Room No. 1918, 19Th Plot No. C-30, G-Block, Opp. Sidbi, Bkc, Bandra – (E), Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400 051 Nariman Point, Mumbai- Vs. 400 021. Pan: Aaacp0522B Appellant Respondent Dcit, Central Circle - M/S K. Raheja Corp. Pvt. (2)(1), Central Range -4 Ltd., Plot No. C-30, Block -G, Pr.Cit (C)-2 Bkc, Bandra (Eest), Room No. 1918, 19Th Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Floor, Air India Building, Pan: Aaacp0522B Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Madhur Aggrawal (Ar) Revenue By : Shri. Shiddaramappa (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

…observed by the A.O that the assessee during the year was holding unsold stock of flats/shops as stock-in-trade of its business. Relying on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Del), the A.O called upon the assessee to explain as to why “Annual Lettable Value” (ALV) of the aforesaid properties may not be determined as per Sec. 22 of the Act under the head “House Property”. As the reply filed 5 K. Raheja Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai 6 ITA No. 7109/Mum/2018 – A.Y 2012-13 K. Raheja Corp Pvt. Lt…

K. Raheja Corporate Services P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Ravish Soodk. Raheja Corporate Services Acit-14(2)(1), Room No. 432, 4Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd., Plot No. C-30, G- Block, Opp. Sidbi, Bkc, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Bandra, Mumbai-400 051 Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Pan: Aabcn 9309B Appellant Respondent K. Raheja Corporate Pvt. Ltd., Dcit- Central Circle 4(2), Room No. 1918, 19Th Plot No. C-30, G-Block, Opp. Sidbi, Bkc, Bandra – (E), Floor, Air India Building, Mumbai-400 051 Nariman Point, Mumbai- Vs. 400 021. Pan: Aaacp0522B Appellant Respondent Dcit, Central Circle - M/S K. Raheja Corp. Pvt. (2)(1), Central Range -4 Ltd., Plot No. C-30, Block -G, Pr.Cit (C)-2 Bkc, Bandra (Eest), Room No. 1918, 19Th Mumbai-400 051 Vs. Floor, Air India Building, Pan: Aaacp0522B Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021. Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Madhur Aggrawal (Ar) Revenue By : Shri. Shiddaramappa (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2021

…observed by the A.O that the assessee during the year was holding unsold stock of flats/shops as stock-in-trade of its business. Relying on the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Del), the A.O called upon the assessee to explain as to why “Annual Lettable Value” (ALV) of the aforesaid properties may not be determined as per Sec. 22 of the Act under the head “House Property”. As the reply filed 5 K. Raheja Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai 6 ITA No. 7109/Mum/2018 – A.Y 2012-13 K. Raheja Corp Pvt. Lt…

Ferani Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 4 (1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand dismissed

…’s appeal learned CIT(A) confirmed the Assessing Officer’s action as under :- 7.3 I have considered the facts of the case, submissions and contentions of the assessee, as also the order of the AO. In the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court had decided an identical issue. The relevant portion of the judgement is reproduced as under:- "13. In the present case, the assessee is engaged in building activities. It argues that flats are held as part of its inventory of stock-in-trade, and are not let out. The further argument is that unlike in the other insta…

M/S Runwal Constructions, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT Central Circle-4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri Rajesh Kumar ()

…sets Runwal Constructions & Runwal Builders held as business, income from the same is not assessable u/s.23(1) of the IT Act. 4. On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd., 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) in support of the proposition that even in respect of unsold flats by the developer is liable to be taxed as income from house property. 5. We have considered rival contentions and perused the record. The issue under consideration has been restored by the CIT(A) to the file of AO to compute the annual value. Recently the Hon'ble Supreme C…

M/S Dosti Corporation (Pinnacle), Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 17 (1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed in the terms indicated above

…en, the Tribunal started applying the analogy.” Assessment year: 2015-16 Page 4 of 5 9. Admittedly, the lower authorities had relied on the judgement of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT Vs. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Company Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Delhi) and had therein concluded that the notional lettable value of the unsold flats held by the assessee was liable to be determined and brought to tax under the head „Income from house property‟. We find that the issue under consideration before us i.e whether the notional lettable value of the property held by an assessee as stock-in-trade i…

Dy CIT CC 4 (1), Mumbai vs. M/S Kanakia Spaces Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S Kanakia Spaces Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle – 4(1), Vs. 10Th Floor, 215 Atrium, Andheri Room No. 1918, 19Th Floor, Kurla Road, Andheri (E) Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan No. Aaack2629J (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.R Revenue By : Shri Gurbinder Singh, D.R Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/08/2021

…e form of booking memos etc. in support of its claim that the same is sold in near future. However, the AO was not convinced with the above explanation of the appellant and relying on the decision in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd. (2013) 354 ITR 180 (Del), worked out the ALV at Rs.2,21,53,896/- as the ALV of unsold flats/units and added sum of Rs.1,55,07,727/- under the head „Income from House Property‟ after giving deduction @ 30% u/s 24(a) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the AO the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) relied on the decision in Ansal Housi…

M/S Repton Properties Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 5(3)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No. 2307/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/S Repton Properties Pvt. Ltd. Ito – 5(3)(1) बिाम/ A-5, 2Nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Tardeo, Mumbai-400 034 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2812-A (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Vinay Sinha, Ld. Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 09/08/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 09/08/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13 Arises Out Of The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-10, Mumbai [Cit(A)], Dated 03/10/2018 In The Matter Of Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 14/11/2014. 2. The Only Issue Under The Appeal Is Addition Of Notional Rent On Unsold Flats Held As Stock-In-Trade. The Assessee Being Resident

…1 M/s Repton Properties Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year: 2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “डी” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एवुं माननीय श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल ,लेखा दस्य के मक्ष। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No. 2307/Mum/2019 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) M/s Repton Properties Pvt. Ltd. ITO – 5(3)(1) बिाम/ A-5, 2nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Tardeo, Mumbai-400 034 Mumbai-400 020 स्थायीलेखा िं./…