Emtici Engineering Ltd. v. Asstt. Commissioner

DCIT 14(1)(1), MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, MUMBAI vs. NEELKANTH URBAN DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD, MUMBAI

…Assessing Officer concluded that the notional rental income on closing stock of units was liable to tax in the hands of the Assessee. Relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Emtici Engineering Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax: 58 TTJ 27, the Assessing Officer computed the notional rental income at the rate of 8% of the value of the closing stock and made addition of INR 1,77,89,901/- as income from house property in the hands of the Assessee invoking provisions of Section 23(1)(a) of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the Assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended tha…

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN THANKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN THAKURDAS GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRLE - 5(2), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for assessment year 2014 – 15 also

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

…the fair and just return of income on such investment. The learned CIT – A also ITA No. 2089, 709 to 713 & 718 Mum/2023 A.Y. 2010-11, 14-15, 11-12, 12-13, 13-14, 15-16, 16-17 Mohan Thakurdas Guranani relied on the decision of the coordinate bench in case of [58 TTJ 27] wherein 8% return on such cost was also held to be the annual value of a property for taxation under the head income from house property. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned lower authorities in assuming 5% of the cost of the investment as the annual value of the property which can be taxed under section 23 (1) of t…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. CY CIT-CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

PRIYA MOHAN GURNANAI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY CIT -CC-5(2), MUMBAI

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

…y referred to the decision of honourable Allahabad High Court wherein the 7% of the investment has been considered as a fair method of determining the annual letting value as reported in [4 taxmann 183]. He further referred to the coordinate bench decision in 58 TTJ 27 where 8% of the investment is held to be the annual value. With respect to the vacancy- allowance of those flats and determination of annual value, he submitted that issue is squarely covered against the assessee by the decision of honourable Punjab and Haryana High Court in 76 taxmann.com 349. He submitted that there is no infirmity in the order o…

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

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

…floor has been rented out @Rs.77,75,567/- hence, such estimation of ALV @Rs.77,75,567/- is not at all on higher side or unreasonable. Such finding of Assessing Officer get support from decision of Hon'ble ITAT in case of EMTICI Engineering Ltd. vs. ACIT(1991) 58 TTJ 27 (Ahmedabad)., ITO vs. Chem Mech Pvt. Ltd.(2002) 83 ITD 427 (Mum.)(ITAT) and Shri Bipinbhai Vadilal Family Trust No.1 vs. CIT (1994) 208 ITR 1005(Guj.). It is seen that same issue on same facts was there in the case of appellant for A.Y. 2011-12 & A.Y. 2012-13 which has been decided against the assessee by my Ld. Predecessor. However, in the appella…

DCIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NARESH CHANDER OBEROI, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

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.

…puted by the A.O in respect of the properties viz. flat No. 31B, Maker Tower and Flat no. 171-B, Maker Tower @ 8% of the cost of the flat as held by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Emtici Engineering Ltd., Vs. Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Tax [1997] 58 TTJ 27 (AHD.). 5. The appellant prays that the order of CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the A.O be restored. Shri Naresh Chander Oberoi Assessment Years :2013-14 & 2014-15 4.1 Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident individual was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 on 29/…

ACIT 3(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. NARESH CHANDER OBEROI, MUMBAI

The appeal stands dismissed

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.

…puted by the A.O in respect of the properties viz. flat No. 31B, Maker Tower and Flat no. 171-B, Maker Tower @ 8% of the cost of the flat as held by Hon’ble ITAT in the case of Emtici Engineering Ltd., Vs. Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Tax [1997] 58 TTJ 27 (AHD.). 5. The appellant prays that the order of CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the A.O be restored. Shri Naresh Chander Oberoi Assessment Years :2013-14 & 2014-15 4.1 Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident individual was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 on 29/…