CIT v. Tip Top Typography

368 ITR 330High Court2014#614 most cited

What is CIT v. Tip Top Typography authority for?

For computing income from house property, the Annual Letting Value (ALV) cannot be arbitrarily estimated by the Assessing Officer, but must be determined based on the Municipal ratable value of the property.

161

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Tip Top Typography · Section 23 · Section 23(1)(a) · annual letting value · ALV · notional rent · income from house property · municipal ratable value · estimated ALV · computation of annual value

Also reported as

48 Taxmann.com 191228 Taxmann 244

Sections most often in play

Section 23(1)(a)Section 14ASection 23Section 22Section 23(5)Section 23(1)(c)Section 250Section 8D
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 23(1)(a)section 23(5)section 23(1)(c)section 23(1)annual letting valueannual valuesection 22section 23section 32disallowance under section 14aunexplained expendituresection 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Tip Top Typography

Dimple Enteprises, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 477/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 143(1)Section 22Section 23

…no notional rent can be computed. And Lastly, Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in making estimate of 8.5% of investment as ALV which is unsustainable in view of the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT Vs. Tip top Typography reported in 368 ITR 330, wherein, it has been held that rent should be computed at Municipal ratable value. We accordingly direct the AO to ascertain the Municipal ratable value for computing the notional rent. This is also been held by ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Dimple Enterprise Vs. DCIT (Supra), in the following manner:- “Now the question is of the rental value…

DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1825/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…no notional rent can be computed. And Lastly, Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in making estimate of 8.5% of investment as ALV which is unsustainable in view of the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT Vs. Tip top Typography reported in 368 ITR 330, wherein, it has been held that rent should be computed at Municipal ratable value. We accordingly direct the AO to ascertain the Municipal ratable value for computing the notional rent. This is also been held by ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Dimple Enterprise Vs. DCIT (Supra), in the following manner:- “Now the question is of the rental value…

DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomjee Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1824/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…no notional rent can be computed. And Lastly, Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in making estimate of 8.5% of investment as ALV which is unsustainable in view of the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT Vs. Tip top Typography reported in 368 ITR 330, wherein, it has been held that rent should be computed at Municipal ratable value. We accordingly direct the AO to ascertain the Municipal ratable value for computing the notional rent. This is also been held by ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Dimple Enterprise Vs. DCIT (Supra), in the following manner:- “Now the question is of the rental value…

DCIT Central Circel-2(4), Mumbai vs. Rustomji Evershine Joint Venture, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue for AY 2013-14 &

ITA 1349/MUM/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. Cross Objection No. 27/Mum/2023 Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.1349/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Rustomjee Evershine Joint बिधम/ Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Venture Vs. Global City, Narangi Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Bypass Road, Close To Viva Road, Churchgate, College, Virar (W), Virar- Mumbai-400020. 401303. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.1824 & 1825/Mum/2022 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2014-15) Dcit, Central Circle-2(4) बिधम/ Rustomjee Evershine Room No. 802, 8Th Floor, Joint Venture Vs. Prathishtha Bhavan, M. K. Global City, Narangi Road, Churchgate, Mumbai- Bypass Road, Close To 400020. Viva College, Virar (W), Virar-401303. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaar7687M (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Naresh Kumar Revenue By: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. Cit) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/07/2023

For Appellant: Shri Naresh KumarFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule (Addl. CIT)

…no notional rent can be computed. And Lastly, Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified in making estimate of 8.5% of investment as ALV which is unsustainable in view of the decision of Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case CIT Vs. Tip top Typography reported in 368 ITR 330, wherein, it has been held that rent should be computed at Municipal ratable value. We accordingly direct the AO to ascertain the Municipal ratable value for computing the notional rent. This is also been held by ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Dimple Enterprise Vs. DCIT (Supra), in the following manner:- “Now the question is of the rental value…

Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai vs. Icici Bank Ltd (in Respect of M.S, Icici Ltd Merged With M.S, Icici Bank Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8435/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “सी”,मुंबई "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अमरजीत"संह, लेखाकार सद"यके सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. ICICI Bank Limited, ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. PAN: AAACI-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं.8420 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) ICICI Bank Limite…

Icici Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 8420/MUM/2010[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jul 2023AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri Amarjit Singhआअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner Of Income-Tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. Icici Bank Limited, Icici Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. Pan: Aaaci-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Visanji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Chhotaray, Spl. Counsel
Section 10Section 10(15)Section 23Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 80M

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “सी”,मुंबई "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अमरजीत"संह, लेखाकार सद"यके सम" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.8435 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) The Dy.Commissioner of Income-tax ,Cir. 3(1), Room No.607, 6th Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai – 400 020 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम Vs. ICICI Bank Limited, ICICI Bank Towers, Bandra-Kurla-Complex, Bandra(East), Mumbai 400 051. PAN: AAACI-1195-H .....""तवाद"/Respondent आअसं.8420 /मुं/2010("न.व. 2003-04) ICICI Bank Limite…

Moraj Building Concepts Pvt Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 420/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Moraj Building Concepts Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle- 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 266/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Moraj Building Concepts Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir -5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 265/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Moraz Building Concepts Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent Cir 5(2), `Mumbai

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

ITA 264/MUM/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Moraj Building Concepts Pvt.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir -5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 263/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 1Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Saleem Mohd. Nazir Shaikh, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 495/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri K. GopalFor Respondent: Shri Purnesh Gururani
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 254(1)

…the maximum yield of residential properties in Mumbai is 3.5 to 4%. Learned AR further submitted that the annual letting value of the property be determined in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs Tip Top Typography, (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom.). 7. On the contrary, the learned Departmental Representative by vehemently relying upon the orders passed by the lower authorities submitted that the learned CIT(A) followed its order rendered in assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2012–13, which has been accepted by the assessee and therefore, the impugned order be upheld. 8. We…

Bharat K. Sheth, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, two appeals for AY 2000-01 and 2005-06 are partly allowed and Appeal for AY 2006-

ITA 3143/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U Matkarni, DR
Section 220

…. He referred to paragraph no.7.1 of that decision. As per that decision the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in A.Y. 1996-97 and 97-98 was followed. The co-ordinate Bench following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, 368 ITR 330 deleted addition. In that year, the income from the house property was determined at ₹36,00,000/-. Therefore, now the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the co- ordinate Bench. 011. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 012. We have carefully considered the riv…

Bharat K. Sheth, Mumbai vs. ACIT 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, two appeals for AY 2000-01 and 2005-06 are partly allowed and Appeal for AY 2006-

ITA 3142/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U Matkarni, DR
Section 220

…. He referred to paragraph no.7.1 of that decision. As per that decision the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in A.Y. 1996-97 and 97-98 was followed. The co-ordinate Bench following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, 368 ITR 330 deleted addition. In that year, the income from the house property was determined at ₹36,00,000/-. Therefore, now the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the co- ordinate Bench. 011. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 012. We have carefully considered the riv…

Bharat K. Sheth, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, two appeals for AY 2000-01 and 2005-06 are partly allowed and Appeal for AY 2006-

ITA 3141/MUM/2010[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Jeet Kamdar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vranda U Matkarni, DR
Section 220

…. He referred to paragraph no.7.1 of that decision. As per that decision the decision of the co-ordinate Bench in A.Y. 1996-97 and 97-98 was followed. The co-ordinate Bench following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, 368 ITR 330 deleted addition. In that year, the income from the house property was determined at ₹36,00,000/-. Therefore, now the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the co- ordinate Bench. 011. The learned Departmental Representative supported the orders of the lower authorities. 012. We have carefully considered the riv…

DCIT Cent. Cir -4(2), Mumbai vs. M/S. Inorbit Malls (India ) Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2220/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.2220/Mum/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Dcit Central Cir-4(2) M/S. Inorbit Malls P.Ltd Room No.1918, 19Th Floor, बिधम/ Plot No.C-30,Bnlock-G, Air India Bldg, Nariman Opp Sidbi Bank, Bkc, Point Mumbai 400021 Vs. Bandra (East), Mumbai 400050 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aaack9106G (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Mr. Madhur Agarwal, Adv. प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Mr. Ganesh Bare, Cit Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 14.07.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 11.10.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla:

For Appellant: Mr. Madhur Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Mr. Ganesh Bare, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 153A

…ue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any ad hoc computation of deemed rent. Honorable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. Thus assessing officer has made an ad hoc estimate of 8.5% of investment on the plea that assessee has not been able to provide the municipal ratable value. This is not sustainable on the touchstone of Hon'ble Bombay High Court decision in the case of Tip Top Typography (supra). In our considered opinion nothing st…

Vama Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As Vama Department Store Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 957/MUM/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Uranda U. Matkari
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 952, 953, 954, 955, 956 & 957/MUM/2020 (A.Y. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) M/s. Vama Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT – Circle – 5(3) (formerly known as Vama Department Store Pvt. Ltd.,) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Kanchanjunga, 72, Peddar Road Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400026 PAN: AAACV1262E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Prakash Jotwani Department by : Uranda U. Matkari Date of Hearing : 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…

Vama Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As Vama Department Store Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 956/MUM/2020[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Uranda U. Matkari
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 952, 953, 954, 955, 956 & 957/MUM/2020 (A.Y. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) M/s. Vama Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT – Circle – 5(3) (formerly known as Vama Department Store Pvt. Ltd.,) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Kanchanjunga, 72, Peddar Road Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400026 PAN: AAACV1262E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Prakash Jotwani Department by : Uranda U. Matkari Date of Hearing : 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…

Vama Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As Vama Department Store Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 955/MUM/2020[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Uranda U. Matkari
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 952, 953, 954, 955, 956 & 957/MUM/2020 (A.Y. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) M/s. Vama Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT – Circle – 5(3) (formerly known as Vama Department Store Pvt. Ltd.,) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Kanchanjunga, 72, Peddar Road Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400026 PAN: AAACV1262E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Prakash Jotwani Department by : Uranda U. Matkari Date of Hearing : 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…

Vama Pvt Ltd(Formerly Known As Vama Department Store Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Circle- 5(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 954/MUM/2020[2003-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2003-03

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Prakash JotwaniFor Respondent: Uranda U. Matkari
Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 69C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOs. 952, 953, 954, 955, 956 & 957/MUM/2020 (A.Y. 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05 & 2005-06) M/s. Vama Pvt. Ltd., v. ACIT – Circle – 5(3) (formerly known as Vama Department Store Pvt. Ltd.,) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Kanchanjunga, 72, Peddar Road Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400026 PAN: AAACV1262E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Prakash Jotwani Department by : Uranda U. Matkari Date of Hearing : 11.08.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…