How many judgments cite CIT v. Tip Top Typography?

161 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Tip Top Typography (368 ITR 330), spanning 2015 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Tip Top Typography come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 23(1)(a), Section 14A, Section 23, Section 22, Section 23(5), Section 23(1)(c).

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 14A Section 23 Section 22 Section 23(5)Section 23(1)(c)Section 250 Section 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 value annual value section 22 section 23 section 32 disallowance under section 14a unexplained expenditure section 115jb

Judgments citing CIT v. Tip Top Typography

Sanjay Digambar Malve, Nashik vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1496/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 2(22)(e)

…he A.O. is on a higher side and the A.O. may be directed to adopt the municipal ratable value as deemed rent in view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Smt. Smitaben N. Ambani v. CWT [323 ITR 104] and CIT v. Tip Top Typography [368 ITR 330 (Bom)]. 3. Before us, at the outset, Ld.A.R. submitted that he does not wish to press ground Nos.1, 2, 4.2, 6, 8 and 9. In view of the aforesaid submission, these grounds are dismissed as not pressed. 4. Ground No.3 is with respect to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 4.1. During the course of assessment proceedings AO noticed that assessee h…

Prakash K. Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4566/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya

For Appellant: Shri N.R. AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Section 14A

…stimate of notional rent on properties which remain vacant by estimating 7% return. 6. Upon hearing both the learned Counsel for the assessee and perused the records, I find that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, [2015] 368 ITR 330 (Bom.), has expounded that municipal rateable value cannot be brushed aside unless the Assessing Officer is able to bring on record that there is 4 Shri Prakash K. Shah effort on the part of assessee to suppress the rental income. I find it appropriate to remit this issue to the file of Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall consider the…

Filmkraft Productions (I) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2011-12 & 2012-13 are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5183/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/s. Filmkraft ACIT Circle -16(1), Productions (I) P. Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, B/27, Commerce Centre, M.K. Marg, Vs. Off New Link Road, New Marine Lines, Andheri – West, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 053 PAN: AAACF3549E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri K. Gopal, A.R. Smt. Neha Paranjpe, Shri Sumanta Sen, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, D.R. Date of Hearing : 27.08.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2019 O R D E…

Rakeshkumar Wadhawan, Mumbai vs. ACIT CC-5(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 2681/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Shri Rakeshkumar Wadhawan Vs. Acit, Central Circle 5(4) Wadhawan House, Union Park Mumbai Road, 5, Shatranj Hotel Bandra (W) Mumbai – 400 050 Pan/Gir No. Aaepw7656G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)

…nce on the decision of this tribunal in the case of Vishwanath Acharaya vs ACIT reported in 157 ITD 1032 (Mum Trib) dated 16.12.2015 which placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Tip Top Typgraphy reported in 368 ITR 330 (Bom) wherein the issue was set aside to the file of ld AO for denovo adjudication. Both the parties before us agreed for restoring this issue to the file of ld AO for denovo adjudication by also keeping in mind the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in 368 ITR 330 (Bom). Accordingly, the Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee i…

Vinay Sudarshan Gupta, Mumbai vs. ITO -17 (3)(5), Mumbai

In the result, the ground of appeal

ITA 5027/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Pawan Singhvinay Sudarshan Gupta, Income Tax Officer 17(3)(5), Room No. 113 , 1St Floor , 418, Giriraj, Iron Market, Vs. Carnac Bunder, Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Mumbai 400009. Mumbai 4000020 Pan: Aa Bpg 4519R Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri Devendra Jain (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Sr Dr)

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain (AR)For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria (Sr DR)

Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 23(1)Section 254(1)

…able on record. The ld AR for the assessee submits that the case may be restored to the file of Assessing Officer to recompute the ALV of all the shops and offices by applying the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [368 ITR 330 (Bom)]. It was further submitted that the assessee may be given the benefit in respect of those shops which are self-occupied by assessee. 4. On the other hand the ld.s DR for the revenue supported the order of the lower authorities. The ld. DR for the revenue submits that in case of restoring the issue to the file of Assessing Officer, all the i…

DCIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Naresh Chander Oberoi, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 5565/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.1601/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2013-14) & आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.5565/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2014-15) Acit – 3(2)(2) Shri Naresh Chander Oberoi, Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, बनाम/ 181 B Jolly Maker Tower A, No.1, 18T H Floor, Cuffe Parade Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. Colaba, Mumbai – 400005. Mumbai – 400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaepo-2381-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Revenue By : Ms. Bharti Singh- Ld. Dr Assessee By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala - Ld.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 05/08/2019 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 09/08/2019 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (): - 1. Aforesaid Appeals By Revenue For Assessment Years [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2013-14 & 2014-15 Contest The Order Of Ld. First Appellate Authority On Certain Common Grounds Of Appeal & Therefore, Disposed Of By Way Of This Consolidated Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Bharti Singh- Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 23

…ssessee’s favor by catena of judicial pronouncements wherein it has been held that municipal rateable value is a recognized basis for determination of ALV. The said proposition has duly been approved by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Tip Top Typography [368 ITR 330] as well as in Smt. Smitaben N.Ambani V/s CWT [323 ITR 104] which has subsequently been followed by Hon’ble Court in number of decisions. Therefore, no infirmity could be found in the impugned order, in this regard. The other decisions of this Tribunal also support the said proposition. Additionally, no fault could be found in the reasoning of Ld…

ACIT 3(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Naresh Chander Oberoi, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 1601/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2019AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala - Ld.ARFor Respondent: Ms. Bharti Singh- Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 23

S.P. Corporation, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 11(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5564/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri G. Manjunatha, Am S.P. Corporation Vs. Acit, Range-11(1) 65, Sterling Theatre Basement Aayakar Bhavan Murzaban Road, Fort Munbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaafs1086L Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36

…case for AY 2009-10 where, under identical set of facts, the Tribunal has set aside the issue to the file of the AO to determine ALV of the house property in light of decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. TIP Top Typography (368 ITR 330). Facts being identical for the year under consideration, the issue may be set aside to the AO to decide the ALV of the house property on the basis of findings of the Tribunal for AY 2009-10. The Ld. DR, on the other hand fairly accepted that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT for AY 2009-10. 6. We have heard…

Owais M. Husain, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer (It) 2(2)(1), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed to that extent

ITA 7066/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Prakash K. Jotwani- Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal- Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 149Section 23(1)(a)Section 3

…y been delved into by the co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2006-07 ITA No. 4320/Mum/2016 order dated 11/05/2018, wherein the bench at para 18, relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT V/s Tip Top Typography 368 ITR 330 directed Ld. AO to adopt the deemed rent as per Municipal Rateable value and assess the income accordingly. This decision has 8 Shri Owais M. Husain Assessment Year-2008-09 subsequently been followed by Tribunal in AY 2007-08 ITA No.6989/Mum/2016 order dated 29/06/2018. Therefore, facts being pari- materia the same, we direct Ld. AO to compute th…

Rameti Devi Jain, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 39, Mumbai

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

ITA 3916/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Rameti Devi Jain, 82, The Assistant Commissioner Maker Chambers Iii, Of Income Tax, Central Circle Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 6(4), Air Building, 19Th Floor, 400021. Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aabpj1887B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/05/2019

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. Chaitanya Anjaria, DR

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)

…in the AY 2009-10 may be adopted in AY 2010-11. Accordingly, the AO adopted the amount of Rs.3,70,872/- being ALV determined by the AO in respect of the impugned house property. 3. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) following the decision in Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom) held that in the case of a property which is vacant, the ALV should be determined on the basis of rateable value fixed by the municipal authorities. Further the Ld. CIT(A) held as under: “The appellant has admitted ALV of flats/properties under consideration at Rs.13,013/-. The said value of Rs.13,013/- has been arrived by increasing the Ra…

Blueberry Trading Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4264/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodblueberry Trading Company The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Pvt. Ltd., Tax-3(1) C/62, Vibgyor Towers, 9Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Joshi, A.RFor Respondent: S/Sh. Abi Rama Kartikiyen

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…ition of ‘annual value’ as per Sec. 23(1) of the I.T. Act and the definition of the same in the relevant Municipal Corporation Act. The Ld. A.R taking support of the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330 (Bom) submitted that the Hon’ble High Court had approved that municipal rateable value is a safe guide for computation of ‘annual value’ as per Sec. 23(1)(a) of the I.T. Act, and have also accepted that notional interest on interest free security deposit cannot form part of the ‘annual value’ whether as per Sec. 23(1)(a) or Sec. 23(1)(b) of the I…

Suresh Shivlal Bhasin, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 25(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6584/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh B Advani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh

Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…arned Sr. Departmental Representative relied on the orders of the lower authorities. Before us, the learned Counsel for the assessee argued that the issue is covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 368 ITR 330 (Bom.), wherein it is held that to assess the fair market value either the Municipal ratable value should be adopted or the AO should find out fair market value on the basis of some definite evidences to determine the deemed rent under section 23(1)(a) of the Act. We also noted that the AO from the very beginning is assessing the notional value o…

Viren Vini Ahuja, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 8(4), Mumbai

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1855/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri G. Manjunathavirenvini Ahuja Assistant Commissioner Of Bunglow No.1 Income Tax, Central, Circle- Neelkanth Teerth, 8(4), Mumbai-400021. Road No.6,Chembur, Vs. Mumbai-400 071. Pan: Aacpa4809M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri J.P.Bairagra (Ar) Respondent By : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (Dr)

For Appellant: Shri J.P.Bairagra (AR)For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 23(1)

…in respect of flat at God blessing, Pune comes to Rs. 71,900/- as against the value adopted by AO at Rs. 59,85,145/-.In support of his submission the Ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the cae of Tip Top Typography 368 ITR 330, M.V. Sonavala Vs. CIT 177 ITR 246(Bombay), CIT vs. Angel Infin (P) Ltd. 225 Taxman 78 (Bombay) and Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs. Smt. Prabhabati Bansali 141 ITR 419. The Ld. AR finally submits that the case law relied by the AO in ITO v/s. Chem. Mech (P) Ltd. 83 ITD 427 is not applicable on the facts of the case of assessee.…

Ivp Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with the above directions

ITA 4417/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhaayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 4417/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Ivp Ltd. The Income Tax Officer, S.N. Redij Marg, Ghorupdeo, Ward 6(1)(2), Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400 053 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aaaci0992A अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri Divyesh Shah, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri B.S. Bist, Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 01.11.2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01.11.2018 Aadosa / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Divyesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist, DR

Section 143(3)

…he learned Sr. DR Shri. BS Bist, he could not support the assessment order with any evidence which is relied on by the AO. I find that this issue is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography (2014) 368 ITR 330(Bom), wherein the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Moni Kumar Subba (2011) 333 ITR 38 (Del) was considered and find that Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Tip Top Typography (supra) held as under:- “48. We are not in agreement with Shri Chhotaray that the municipal rateable value cannot be accepted as a bona fide rental va…

Harsh Anandkumar Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir39, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed and appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 3891/MUM/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3668 & 3748/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Dcit, Cc-6(4) बिधम/ Shri Harsh Jain 82, Maker Chamber Iii, R. No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- Air India Building, 400021. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. Ita. Nos. 3891 & 3892/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Harsh Anandkumar Jain बिधम/ Acit, Central, Circle 6(4) 82, Makar Chambers Iii Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Afbpj0984J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue As Well As Assessee Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-54, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys.2011-12 & 2012-13. Ita. Nos. 3668 & 3748/Mum/2017 3891 & 3892/Mum/2017 A.Ys. 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (Dr)

Section 139Section 143(2)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. Nos.3668 & 3748/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) DCIT, CC-6(4) बिधम/ Shri Harsh Jain 82, Maker Chamber III, R. No. 1925, 19th Floor, Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- Air India Building, 400021. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. ITA. Nos. 3891 & 3892/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Harsh Anandkumar Jain बिधम/ ACIT, Central, Circle 6(4) 82, Makar Chambers III Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai- 400021. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/G…

Virendrakumar Jain, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 6(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3886/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Amarjeet Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Anurag Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra, D.R

…e same and recomputed ALV at Rs.68,36,502/-. The ITA No.3666/Mum/2017 & 3845/Mum/2017 Shri Virendra Jain 3 M/s. Virendrakumar Jain 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 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 the same to the facts of…

Hightech Realties P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 12(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby ordered to be allowed

ITA 2728/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2728/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Hightech Realties Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Ito Ward 12(2)(4) 1St Floor, Ruchi House, Plot Mumbai. Vs. No. 169, Aarey Colony, Goregaon (W), Mumbai- 400065. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacch0026J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (Dr) Assessee By: Shri Bhupendra Shah (Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24.10.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 08.03.2012 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) - 20, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2013- 14. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “[A] Grounds Of Appeal; 1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned A.O, Erred In Adding Rs 63,95,231. Under The Head “Income From House Property" & The Commissioner Of Income Tax(A) Erred In Confirming Addition Of Rs.12.60.000/-

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra Shah (AR)For Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 23(1)Section 234Section 24ASection 27l

…her fair market value of the property for the purpose of deemed rent under section 23(1)(a) or 23(1)(c) can be estimated. The learned Counsel for the assessee relied on the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography [2014] 368 ITR 330 (Bombay), wherein held as under:- “4.6. We have and after careful reading of the provision in question and the conclusion of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court concluded that a different view cannot be taken. We respectfully concur with the view taken in this Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court. 47. We are of the view that where Rent…

Vijay Grihnirman P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2002/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S. Vijay Grihniramn P. Ltd. Dcit. Central Circle-3(1) 201, Marine Chambers Mumbai Vs. 43, New Marine Lines Mumbai 400020 Pan – Aaacv2806N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mani Jain &For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

Section 23

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Saktijit Dey, Judicial Member and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member M/s. Vijay Grihniramn P. Ltd. DCIT. Central Circle-3(1) 201, Marine Chambers Mumbai Vs. 43, New Marine Lines Mumbai 400020 PAN – AAACV2806N Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Mani Jain & Shri Prateek Jain Respondent by: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra Date of Hearing: 08.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, JM Aforesaid appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-51, Mumbai dat…

Kajol Vishal Devgan, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1702/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Ruturaj H. GurjarFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Singh

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

…thorised Representative submitted, determination of ALV @ 8% of the cost of the property is purely on ad–hoc basis 4 Smt. Kajol Vishal Devgan having no sanctity as it is not as per the market rate. He submitted, in case of CIT v/s Tip Top Typography, [2015] 368 ITR 330 (Bom.), the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has held that the Assessing Officer cannot determine the ALV on ad–hoc basis which cannot be treated as fair rent as per municipal ratable value. He further submitted, the assessee’s claim of vacancy allowance under section 23(1)(c) of the Act also requires to be considered property. Therefore, he sub…

Hrithik Roshan, Mumbai vs. Joint CIT RG 16(1), Mumbai

Appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our above order

ITA 3513/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Appellant: K.Gopal & Neha Paranjpe, Ld. ARsFor Respondent: Manoj Kumar Singh, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

…ITA.No.3513/Mum/2017 Hrithik Roshan Assessment Year-2012-13 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एच” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" एवं "ी रिवश सूद, "ाियक सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.3513/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Hrithik Roshan Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-16(1) B/27, Commerce Centre बनाम/ Off New Link Road Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Andheri (West) New Marine Lines Mumbai-400 053 Mumbai-400 020 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABPN-2790-F (अपीलाथ"/Appe…