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

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 953/MUM/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022AY 2001-02

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 952/MUM/2020[200-01]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2022

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.…

Manoj Tekriwal, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 24(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4147/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri G.P. MehtaFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar, Sr. AR CIT
Section 14ASection 234ASection 250Section 40Section 54

…earned AR submitted that the properties are situated in Mumbai and therefore are subject to rent control legislation. 11. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that in CIT vs Tip Top Typography: [2014] 368 ITR 330 (Bom.), following substantial questions of law arose for consideration before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court: ―(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Tribunal was right in holding that the fair rental value specified in section 23(1)(a) is the municipal value or actual rent received whichever is higher and not…

Milind Digamber Kolte, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 824/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.824/Pun/2018 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Milind Digamber Kolte, Asst. Commissioner Of Flat No.1, Vs Income Tax, Circle-2, Patil Heritage, Bhosale Nagar, Pune. Pune – 411 005. Pan : Abipk 5780 C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing 07/06/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 05/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune Dated 12.04.2018 Against The Order Under Section 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Also Called As ‘The Act’) Dated 03.03.2016. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is An Individual & File The Return Of Income On 28-09-2013 Declaring Total Income At Rs.2,27,86,637/-. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Under Cass. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessing Officer Observed That The Assessee Has Shown 4 Properties. Out Of The 4 Properties Shown, The Assessee Showed The Flat In Patil Heritage As Self Occupied & The Remaining 3 House Properties Viz., Laxmikrupa

Section 143(3)

…lue has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any adhoc computation of deemed rent. Honourable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT v. Tip Top Typography [2014] 48 taxmann.com 191/[2015] 228 Taxman 244 (Mag.)/[2014] 368 ITR 330 duly supports this proposition. ITA No.824/PUN/2018 for A.Y. 2013-14 Milind D. KolteVs.ACIT, Circle-2, Pune 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 i…

Atul Chandrakant Kirloskar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Dismissed

ITA 3093/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R S Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.3093/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Atul Chandrakant Kirloskar, The Deputy Commissioner 453, Radha, Gokhale Road, Model Vs Of Income Tax, Circle-14, Colony, Pune – 411 016. Pune – 411037. Pan: Abipk 5776 G Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Ch. Naniwadekar – Ar Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 25/05/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 06/06/2022 आदेश / Order Per Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm: This Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Emanates From The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-7, Pune Dated 16.10.2017 For The Assessment Year 2014-15, As Per The Grounds Of Appeal On Record.

Section 23(1)(b)

…a Corporate Entity and Municipal Corporation has estimated rent at Rs.6,140/-. The assessee contended that provisions of section 23(1)(b) of the Act was applicable and relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs Tiptop Typography 368 ITR 330 (Bom). The ld.CIT(A) ITA No.3093/PUN/2017 for A.Y. 2014-15 Atul Chandrakant Kirloskar (A) observed that the AO has computed ALV on the basis of actual rent received by the assessee for Six Months during the A.Y.2013-14 for the same property. It was further observed that though the assessee had submitted relatable value from the Municipal Author…

M/S. Great Fortune Investments and Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2325/PUN/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble Jm & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Hon’Ble Am आयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.2325/Pun/2017 निर्ाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Great Fortune Investments & The Assistant Commissioner Of Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Shop No.6, Rushiraj Heights, Near Cirlce-1, Nashik. Nmc Water Tank, Parijat Nagar, Mahatma Nagar, Nahik. Pan: Aaccg 6406 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket M Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri S.P.Walimbe - Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 08/04/2022

Section 23Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE VIRTUAL COURT OF HEARING BEFORE SHRI S.S.VISWANETHRA RAVI, HON’BLE JM AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, Hon’ble AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No.2325/PUN/2017 निर्ाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Great Fortune Investments and The Assistant Commissioner of Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax, Shop No.6, Rushiraj Heights, Near Cirlce-1, Nashik. NMC Water Tank, Parijat Nagar, Mahatma Nagar, Nahik. PAN: AACCG 6406 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Sanket M Joshi – AR Revenue by Shri S.P.Walimbe - DR Date of…

Deena Asit Mehta, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4449/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, a/wFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar, Sr. A.R. – CIT
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 254(1)Section 254(2)

…of RS.17,01,000. Being aggrieved the assessee is in appeal before us. 7. During the course of hearing, Shri Yogesh Thar, learned Authorised Representative (“learned A.R.”) submitted that Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 held that where a premises is covered by Rent Control Act, Assessing Officer must undertake exercise contemplated by the rent control legislation for fixation of standard rent. However, the aforesaid decision was not pointed out to the Co-ordinate Bench of Tribunal during the course of hearing of assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2012–13. The…

M/S. Satyam Realtors P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC-5(4)Dy CIT CC-5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 552/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

Section 147Section 148Section 234B

…y similar instance. The reliability of municipal ratable value has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any adhoc computation of deemed rent. Hounourable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Tip Top Typography (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 s…

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘SMC’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2015-16] Mrs. Amal Allana, Income Tax Officer, E-30, Greater Kailash, Ward-30(1), New Delhi-110048 New Delhi PAN-ACCPA8359A Assessee Revenue Assessee by Sh. Ashok Kumar Batra, CA Revenue by Sh. Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.11.2021 Date of Pronouncement 23.12.2021 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 08.03.2019 of the learned CIT(A)-10, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Facts of the case, in…

DCIT (E)-1(1), Mumbai vs. Aditya Birla Foundation, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4065/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2021AY 2011-12
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 13(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 154Section 25

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” Bench, Mumbai Shri Shamim Yahya (AM) & Shri Pavankumar Gadale (JM) I.T.A. No. 4065/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year 2011-12) Vs. Aditya Birla Foundation DCIT(E)-1(1) Room No. 506 C-1, Aditya Birla Centre 5th Floor, Piramal S.K. Ahire Marg, Worli Chambers, Lalbaug Mumbai-400 030. Lower Parel Mumbai-400 012. PAN : AAATA0382P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ronak Doshi Department by Shri Rajeev Harit Date of Hearing 07.04.2021 Date of Pronouncement 16.06.2021 O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya (AM) :- This is an appeal by the Revenue directed against the order of learned CIT(A…

Dimple Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(2), Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5269/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2021AY 2015-16
Section 143(2)Section 23(5)Section 270Section 270A

…y similar instance. The reliability of municipal ratable value has been duly upheld in several decisions. The Assessing Officer cannot make any adhoc computation of deemed rent. Hounourable Bombay High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Tip Top Typography (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 s…

Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3304/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment Chs Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aabcb 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies PVT. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment CHS Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 PAN: AABCB 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. ITO- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1st Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Vimal Punmiya ""तवाद" "…

Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 12(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3303/MUM/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthyआअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies Pvt. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment Chs Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 Pan: Aabcb 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Ito- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1St Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Vimal PunmiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Mishra
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण मुंबई पीठ “एस एम सी” , मुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI "ी "वकास अव"थी, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER आअसं. 3303/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2007-08) आअसं. 3304/मुं/2019 ("न.व. 2008-09) Bhiryani Dadlani Sales Agencies PVT. Ltd, Shop Nos.10-11, Kenwood Apartment CHS Ltd., Dr.Ambedkar Road, Bandra (West), Mumbai 400 050 PAN: AABCB 7448M ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. ITO- Ward 12(1)(3) Room No.145A, 1st Floor, Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai 400 020. ..... ""तवाद"/Respondent अपीलाथ" "वारा/ Appellant by : Shri Vimal Punmiya ""तवाद" "…

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)

…on of Tribunal in AY 2012-13, ITA No.3887 & 3665/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…

Sachin Sharad Pilgaonkar, Mumbai vs. ACIT-16(1), Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2378/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2378/Mum/2019 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Sachin Sharad Pilgaonkar Acit-16(1) बनाम/ A/9, Juhu Apartments Aaykar Bhawan Juhu Tara Road, Santacruz (W) M.K.Road Vs. Mumbai-400 049. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aampp-9852-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Patil-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri T.S. Khalsa- Ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24Section 274

…he provisions of Sec. 23(1)(a), the annual value of such property shall be deemed to the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to be let out from year to year. 7. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court, in the case of CIT V/s Tip Top Typography (2014 368 ITR 330) concurred with following principles laid down by full bench of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT V/s Mani Kumar Subba (2011 333 ITR 838) for determination of Annual Letting Value of the property: - (i) ALV would be the sum at which the property may be reasonably let out by a willing lessor to a willing lessee uninfluenced by any extran…

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

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 4648/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2140/Mum/2002 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1527/Mum/2005 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2822/Mum/2006 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2747/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2749/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.8547/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2746/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2251/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 10. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4648/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 11. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2252/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) &

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala-Ld.Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Oommen Thorian -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…1 Shri Bharat K.Sheth आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी श""जीत दे, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2140/Mum/2002 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1527/Mum/2005 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2822/Mum/2006 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2747/Mum/2012…

Bharat K Sheth, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(3)(2), Mumbai

Appeals stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2253/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Dec 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2140/Mum/2002 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1527/Mum/2005 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2822/Mum/2006 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2747/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2002-03) & 5. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2748/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2003-04) & 6. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2749/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05) & 7. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.8547/Mum/2010 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) & 8. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2746/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) & 9. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2251/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & 10. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4648/Mum/2015 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) & 11. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2252/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) &

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala-Ld.Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Shri Oommen Thorian -Ld. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 234A

…1 Shri Bharat K.Sheth आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI माननीय "ी श""जीत दे, "ाियक सद" एवं माननीय "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल ,लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) 1. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2140/Mum/2002 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1998-99) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1527/Mum/2005 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 1999-2000) & 3. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2822/Mum/2006 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2001-02) & 4. आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.2747/Mum/2012…

Trent Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl. C.I.T.-2(3), Mumbai

ITA 5775/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blem/S. Trent Ltd., V. Add. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. Cit – 2(3) V. M/S. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5Th Floor Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Trent Ltd., V. Dy. Cit – 2(3) Bombay House, 2Nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacl1838J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 35DSection 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Add. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) Addl. CIT – 2(3) v. M/s. Trent Ltd., Room No. 556, 5th Floor Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Homi Mody Street, Fort Mumbai - 400 020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAACL1838J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/s. Trent Ltd., v. Dy. CIT – 2(3) Bombay House, 2nd Floor, 24 Aa…

Wendy Leslie Pereira, Mumbai vs. ACIT-21(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7369/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Mar 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Mr. Mandar Vaidya, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Uday Bhaskar Jakke, DR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)

…treating notional rent based on earlier year as ALV. c The appellant submits that looking to the facts and circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider mandate given by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in Tip Top Typography 368 ITR 330(Bom) that for purpose of determining ALV to undertake and apply known method of working out the Annual Value. d In view of the above, the addition made be dropped and Municipal value of property or actual rent received, whichever is higher should be considered as ALV u/s 23(1 )(a) of Income Tax Act, 1961 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case…

Virendra Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1574/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Shri Virendra Jain V. Central Circle – 6(4) 82, Maker Chambers Iii Air India Building Nariman Point Nariman Point Mumbai – 400 021 Mumbai – 400 021 Pan: Aabpj1882Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Shetty Department By : Mrs Samatha Mullamuddi

For Appellant: Shri Amit ShettyFor Respondent: Mrs Samatha Mullamuddi

…sessee was based on the Municipal rateable value. However, the AO did not accept the same and recomputed ALV at Rs.68,36,502/-. The CIT(A) considered various judicial pronouncements including the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Tip Top Typography 368 ITR 330 and also decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in case of other family members of the assessee directed the AO to adopt ALV as per the rateable 3 Shri Virendra Jain value fixed by Municipal Authority at Rs.4,63,651/-. Considering the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court and other High Courts as discussed by CIT(A) in his order and after applying th…