CIT v. Moni Kumar Subba

333 ITR 38High Court2011#1465 most cited

What is CIT v. Moni Kumar Subba authority for?

Notional interest on an interest-free security deposit cannot be considered as actual or deemed rent under Section 23(1) of the Act. For determining Annual Letting Value (ALV) under Section 23(1)(a), it must be in accordance with municipal laws, considering extraneous circumstances, but not exceeding the standard rent as per rent control legislation.

78

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,421 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v Moni Kumar Subba · 333 ITR 38 · Section 23(1) · Section 23(1)(a) · notional interest · interest-free security deposit · deemed rent · annual letting value · ALV · municipal rentable value · standard rent · rent control

Also reported as

10 Taxmann.com 195

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 131
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

self occupied propertysection 23(1)section 80lsection 23(2)interest on interestannual letting valueannual valuesection 23(1)(a)section 2(31)section 22section 40a(3)section 23

Judgments citing CIT v. Moni Kumar Subba

Idhayam Infraheights Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT Central Circle, Faridabad

The appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 6779/DEL/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 6778/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Ita No. 6779/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2021-22 Idhayam Infraheights Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Shop No. 2, Second Floor, Lajpat Central Circle, Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 Faridabad, Haryana-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd9391G Assessee By: Sh. Nikhil Sharma, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025 Order These Assessee’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 6778 & 6779/Del/2025 For Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2021-22, Arise Against The Cit(A)-3, Gurgaon’S In Case Nos. 10948/2019-20 & 10308/2020-21 Both Dated 11.08.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 23(1)Section 24Section 28

…rity deposit(s) amounting to Rs.4,00,00,000/-, as deemed rent u/s 23(1) of the Act which is over and above the actual rent agreed between the parties amounting to Rs.5,000/- per month. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that case law (2011) 333 ITR 38 (Delhi) (FB) CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba has already settled the very issue in the assessee’s favour and against the department that such a notional interest could not form part of the actual rent u/s 23(1) of the Act. I accordingly draw strong support therefrom to reverse both the learned lower authorities’ action adding the impugned notional intere…

Idhayam Infraheights Pvt Ltd, Delhi vs. DCIT Central Cirlce, Faridabad

The appeals are hereby dismissed

ITA 6778/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 6778/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2020-21 Ita No. 6779/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2021-22 Idhayam Infraheights Pvt. Ltd., Vs Dcit, Shop No. 2, Second Floor, Lajpat Central Circle, Nagar-Ii, New Delhi-110024 Faridabad, Haryana-122001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacd9391G Assessee By: Sh. Nikhil Sharma, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 04.12.2025 Order These Assessee’S Twin Appeals In Ita Nos. 6778 & 6779/Del/2025 For Assessment Years 2020-21 & 2021-22, Arise Against The Cit(A)-3, Gurgaon’S In Case Nos. 10948/2019-20 & 10308/2020-21 Both Dated 11.08.2025, In Proceedings U/S 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”), Respectively.

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Sharma, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 23(1)Section 24Section 28

…rity deposit(s) amounting to Rs.4,00,00,000/-, as deemed rent u/s 23(1) of the Act which is over and above the actual rent agreed between the parties amounting to Rs.5,000/- per month. That being the case, the Revenue could hardly dispute that case law (2011) 333 ITR 38 (Delhi) (FB) CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba has already settled the very issue in the assessee’s favour and against the department that such a notional interest could not form part of the actual rent u/s 23(1) of the Act. I accordingly draw strong support therefrom to reverse both the learned lower authorities’ action adding the impugned notional intere…

Ramesh Dungarshi Shah, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inocme Tax, Circle-3, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1220/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Girish Agarwal, Am Ramesh Dungarshi Shah Deputy Commissioner Of Income 108, Shreedhar Apartment, Maulana Tax, Circle – 3, Kalyan Vs. 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Azad Road, Dombivali, East, Thane – 421201. Road, Kalyan West – 421301. Pan/Gir No. Aavps0931K (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Devendra Jain, Adv. (Virtually) : Shri. Asif Karmali (Sr. Dr) Respondent By : 14.02.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16. 2. It Is Observed That The Assessee Has Filed This Present Appeal With A Delay Of 47 Days Beyond The Period Of Limitation For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condoning The Delay Along With The Reasons Specified For The Delay. After Hearing The Rival Contentions, We Deem It Fit To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal For The Reason That There Was ‘Sufficient Cause’ & Bonafide Reasons For The Delay. Delay Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri. Devendra Jain, Adv. (Virtually)For Respondent: 14.02.2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(4)(b)Section 23(5)Section 250

…case of CIT vs. 9 Ramesh Dungarshi Shah Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330, which has relied on the full bench decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Moni Kumar Subba, [2011] 333 ITR 38, where it has been reiterated that for determination of ALV u/s. 23(1)(a) of the Act, the same has to be in accordance with the municipal laws after duly considering the inflated or deflated rent based on extraneous circumstances, if any, which in any case cannot exceed the standard rent as per the Rent Control Legislation applicable to the said p…

Smt. Tejal Kaushal Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, 25(1)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3303/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL (Judicial Member), SMT. RENU JAUHRI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri. Reepal Tralshawala
Section 143(2)Section 23Section 250Section 54

…recedents which has held that only the municipal rentable value should be considered for determining the ALV of the property. The ld. AR relied on the following decisions: a. CIT v. Tip Top Typography [2014] 368 ITR 330 (Bom) b. CIT v. Moni Kumar Subha [2011] 333 ITR 38 (Del.)(FC) c. Smt. Kokilaben D. Ambani v. CIT [2010] 323 ITR 104 (Bom.) 10 Smt. Tejal Kaushal Shah 14. The ld. DR on the other hand controverted the said fact and stated that the assessee has failed to furnish any documentary evidences to establish the fact that the said property was used by the assessee and her husband for their business purpose…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2776/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2775/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2774/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2773/DEL/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2772/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Center Circle-4, Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2771/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

The Kumar Family Trust, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-4, New Delhi

In the result, appeal for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 are unabated and assessments are set aside due to no incriminating material found during the search and the appeals for the said assessment years are...

ITA 2770/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Kumar, Judicialmember

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sapna Bhatia, CIT DR
Section 132Section 139Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 22Section 23(2)

…luation is to be considered as the “prevailing market value” for the purposes of Section 23(l)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 6.2 Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held as follows: “13. The next question would be as to whether the annual letting value fixed by the Municipal Authorities under the Delhi Municipal purposes of section 23 of the Act. This question was answered in affirmative by the Calcutta High Court in Satua Co. Ltd. 's case (supra) on the ground that the provisions contained in…

ACIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gentex Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 196/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Parwani, Sr. DR

…rt in the case of CIT Vs J.K. Investors (Born.) Ltd 248 ITR 723 and by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Asian Hotels Limited 168 Taxman 59. The CIT(A) found that the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in its decision in the case of CIT Vs M.K. Subba 333 ITR 38(del) held that in arriving at the fair rent there is no provision in law for inclusion of any notional interest on interest free deposit received from tenant. The Full Bench of the High Court specifically rejected the Revenue's contention that a reasonable interest can be included in arriving at the true & correct annual value of a house property.…

ACIT 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Nrb Bearings Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, we confirm the order of the learned CIT (A) and dismissed ground no

ITA 4469/MUM/2023[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2024

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm Acit Room No.545, 5Th Floor, Nrb Bearings Limited Aaykar Bhavan 15, Dhannur Mumbai, M.K. Road, Vs. G.P.O. Mumbai-400 001 Mumbai-400 020 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn3479P Assessee By : None : Shri Anil Sant-Addl.Cit Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing: 06.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2024

For Appellant: None
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) was correct in deleting the addition on account of annual let out value of the property ₹13,21,000/- ignoring the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba (333 ITR 38) wherein it was held that rateable value is not binding on the Assessing Officer if the Assessing Officer shows the rateable value as per municipal value of the property is not represents correct fair rent? 2. Ground no.2. whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT (A) was correct in deleting the addition made…

Gurpreet Singh Dhillon, Amritsar vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 1(2)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2673/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

Section 23Section 24Section 251(2)

…ee received interest free refundable security deposit of Rs.38,97,000/- being three months rent at monthly rent of Rs.12,99,000/-. The ld. Counsel placing reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba [(2011) 333 ITR 38 (Del) (FB)] submits that the ld. CIT (Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to add notional interest on security deposit to the ALV of the property. The ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Asian Hotels Ltd. [(2008) 168 Taxman 59 (Del)]. Assessee prays that the addition…

ACIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gemtex Merchants Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1270/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1270/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit-3(1)(1) बिधम/ M/S. Gentex Merchants Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. 81, Maker Chambers-Iii, Road, Mumbai-400020. 223, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcg1491M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala Revenue By: Dr. Kishor Dhule (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 04/07/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/07/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax/Nfac, Delhi Dated 20.02.2023 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The First Ground Of Appeal Of The Revenue Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Restricting The Annual Value Of The Property Let Out At Rs.1,20,00,000/- As Against Rs.14,14,94,120/- Determined By The Ao. 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Company Had Filed Its Return Of Income For Ay. 2012-13 On 29.09.2012 Declaring A Total Loss Of (Rs.2,14,60,919/-). The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Declared Income From Two Heads Of Income Viz. Income From House Property & Income From Business & Profession. & That The Assessee Company Owned A Residential Property At 22, Aurangazeb Road, New Delhi. & That The Assessee Has Let Out The Said Property On Rent Of Rs.1,20,00,000/- For The Year. Further The Assessee Also Charged A Fixed

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Dr. Kishor Dhule (DR)

…rt in the case of CIT Vs J.K. Investors (Born.) Ltd 248 ITR 723 and by the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Asian Hotels Limited 168 Taxman 59. The CIT(A) found that the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in its decision in the case of CIT Vs M.K. Subba 333 ITR 38(del) held that in arriving at the fair rent there is no provision in law for inclusion of any notional interest on interest free deposit received from tenant. The Full Bench of the High Court specifically rejected the Revenue's contention that a reasonable interest can be included in arriving at the true & correct annual value of a house property.…

ACIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Gentex Merchants Private Lmited, Mumbai

ITA 853/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015
For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule
Section 143(3)

…ntention of the Revenue that the annual value of the house property must be increased by 10% of interest free loans received by the Appellant by the following the judgment of the Full Bench of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subbah: 333 ITR 38 Del (FB) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. J.K. Investors (Bom.) Ltd. : [2001] 248 ITR 723. The Tribunal has concluded that as per provisions of Section 23(1)(b) of the Act higher of the municipal valuation or the actual rent received has to be adopted as the annual value. We note that the CIT(A) has adopted…

Akbar Hasnali Padamsee, Mumbai vs. ACIT-18(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 6162/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 6162 To 6166/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16) Akbar Hasanali Padamsee बिधम/ Joint Commissioner Of 802, Vinayak Aagan Chs Ltd, Income Tax-18(2) Vs. Old Prabhadevi Road, Worli, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai-400025. Mumbai-400012. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ahfpp9512N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Ishwer Rathi Revenue By: Shri Mehul Jain (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 28.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2011- 12 To 2015-16. Ita. No.6162/Mum/2019 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 28.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -33, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2011- 12. Ita Nos. 6162 To 6166/M/2019 A.Ys.2011-12 To 2015-16 3. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Ishwer RathiFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos. 6162 to 6166/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2015-16) Akbar Hasanali Padamsee बिधम/ Joint Commissioner of 802, Vinayak Aagan CHS Ltd, Income Tax-18(2) Vs. Old Prabhadevi Road, Worli, Piramal Chambers, Parel, Mumbai-400025. Mumbai-400012. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AHFPP9512N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee by: Shri Ishwer Rathi Revenue by: Shri Mehul Jain (DR) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 12/01/2022 घोषणा…

Amal Allana, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward-30(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 4371/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda[Assessment Year: 2015-16]

Section 154Section 22Section 24

…house property comes at Rs. 12,60,000/-. 7.1.3. I have considered the factual matrix of the case, written submissions and oral arguments of the AR and the order of the AO. In the judgment of Delhi high Court (full bench) in the case of CIT vs Moni Kumar Subba 333 ITR 38, the Hon’ble High Court has held that the annual value fixed by the Municipal Authorities can be a rationale yardstick. It has also been held that if the Assessing Officer can show that rateable value under municipal laws does not represent the correct fair rent, then he may determine the same on the basis of material/evidence placed on record. Th…

Sudher Omprakash Bahl, Mumbai vs. ITO 1(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3987/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2013-14 & Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. T.S. Khalsa, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)

…st on interest free deposit. This was not found to be correct by the ITAT in their order dated 18.11.2011 in the appellant's case for A.Y. 1999-2000 to 2002-03 and 2005-06, in view of decision of the Hon’ble High court of Delhi in the case of Moni Kumar Subba 333 ITR 38, Further, it has been observed by the ITAT that the fair rent was determined by the CIT(A) at Rs.28,000/- per month for A.Y. 1999-2000 to 2002-03 on the basis of the comparable instances Sudheer Omprakash gathered by the AO and the same has been upheld. Further, the fair rent has been estimated for A.Y. 2005-06 at Rs.28,000/- per month as against…

Anand J. Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 6(4), Mumbai

The appeal stands partly allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 6716/MUM/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 6716/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) Shri Anand J. Jain Dcit-Circle 6(4) बनाम/ 19Th Floor, Air India Building 82, Maker Chambers-Iii Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Vs. Mumbai – 400 021 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabpj-1890-J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Michael Jerald-Ld. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Michael Jerald-Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)

…/Mum/2017. In the decision for AY 2012-13, the co- ordinate bench after considering the relevant provisions of Act and also by following the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in M/s TIP Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 and also in Moni Kumar Subba (2011) 333 ITR 38, upheld the determination of ALV on the basis of Municipal Rateable Value. The bench while adjudicating appeals for AYs 2013-14 & 2014-15 further observed that: - 6. We further noticed that the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Income Tax Appeal No.1285 of 2015 in the case of Laxmi Jain has considered the issue of determination at ALV of house property…