ITO v. Chem Mech (P) Ltd.

83 ITD 427Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2002#4413 most cited

What is ITO v. Chem Mech (P) Ltd. authority for?

When a property is vacant or the annual letting value (ALV) is not ascertainable, the ALV can be estimated at 8.5% of the construction cost or investment value. This estimation method is supported by case law, including ITO v. Chem Mech (P) Ltd.

27

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

ITO v Chem Mech · 83 ITD 427 · annual letting value · ALV estimation · vacant property · construction cost · investment value · section 23 · rental income · notional rent

Also reported as

2 SOT 1

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 131(1A)Section 133ASection 234Section 250Section 28Section 65BSection 133A(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 23(5)section 9(1)(ii)section 80absection 73resulting companyannual letting valuetransferor companyclarificatory amendmentsection 24(b)annual valueretrospective amendmentsection 65b

Judgments citing ITO v. Chem Mech (P) Ltd.

Akbar Hasanali Padamsee, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir. 21(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6169/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 Akbar Hasanali Padamsee, Asst. Com. Of Income Tax Cir 802, Vinayakaangan Apts. 18(2), Mumbai Piramal Vs. 93-A Old Prabhadevi Road, Chambers, Parel, Mumbai- Prabhadevi, Mumbai- 400012. 400025. Pan No. Ahfpp9512N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ishwar P. Rathi, Ar Revenue By : Mr Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/01/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/04/2019

For Appellant: Mr. Ishwar P. Rathi, ARFor Respondent: Mr Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh, DR
Section 143(3)

…see never submitted any document in support of his claim. The assessee purchased the property at Rs.5,40,000/-. The assessee has another flat in the same building which costs Rs.76,11,600/-. The AO relied on the order of the ITAT in ITO v. Chem Mech Pvt. Ltd. 83 ITD 427 and estimated the annual letting value (ALV) Akbar Hasanali 4 @ 8.5% of the investment. In view of the above facts, the AO estimated the value of property to Rs.60,00,000/- and estimated the annual letting value (ALV) at Rs.5,10,000/- (8.5% of Rs.60,00,000/-). In respect of the property at Piroja Court, Juhu, (3rd floor), the assessee had offered…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Haware Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 4539/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Devendra Jain- Ld.AR
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24Section 263

…1 M/s. Haware Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Assessment Year-2010-11 आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “एच” "ायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H” BENCH, MUMBAI "ी श""जीत दे,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमारअ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम"। BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JM AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपील सं./ I.T.A. No.4539/Mum/2017 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 DCIT-15(2)(1) M/s. Haware Constructions Pvt. Ltd. बनाम Room 357, 3rd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan नाम नाम/ नाम Ramon House, H.T. Parekh Marg Backbay Reclamation M.K. Road, Mumbai-400 020. Vs. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No. AABCH-3858-F (अपीलाथ…

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)

…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. In that case the assessee let out the flats and received interest free security deposit of Rs. 20 Lacs thereby the tribunal held that the interest @12% of the interest free security is to be included while determining the ALV. Further, the facts of case law in Dr. Balbir Singh (Supra) are als…

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

…mation of ALV @Rs.1,04,17,134/- 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 Bipinibhai Vadilal Family Trust No.1 vs. CIT (1994) 208 ITR 1005(Guj). As regards argument that these properties at 4th floor and 5th floor were being used for Dance, Dialogue, Fight, Stunt Music, Story sitting, rehearsals and meeting purposes, it is pertinent to mention that no evidence has been produced of such claim eithe…

Suketu Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO 17(3)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 4153/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4153/Mum/2017 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Shri Suketu Shah Ito-17(3)(4), बनाम/ 401/402, Tulsiani Chambers, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Afjps 7645 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Anant Pai ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. N. Hemalatha

For Appellant: Shri Anant PaiFor Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha
Section 22Section 23(1)(a)

…preme Court in the case of Mrs. Sheila Kaushish Vs CIT 131 ITR 435 (SC) that a percentage on the investment, which could be treated as a reasonable return for working the standard rent. Further the Murnbai ITAT in the case of JTO vs. Chem Mech (P) Ltd. (2002) 83 ITD 427 (Mum) and ACIT Vs Omprakash & Co. (2004) 87 TTJ 183 (Mum) followed the above decisions. 3.8 When the property is not covered by the Rent Control Act, the annual value can be determined by comparison of annual value fixed of the adjacent properties let out. In Bombay, it is the "Annual Ratable Value" as fixed by the Municipal Corporation Act which…

Can Properties P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 7294/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singhassessment Year: 2010-2011 Can Properties Private Ltd. Ito Ward 8(1)(2), 24, 2Nd Floor, Thosar Wadi, Hanuman Mumbai. Road No.1 Nr Shiv Leela Hotel, Vs. Vile Parle (East), Mumbai-400057. Pan: Aadcc7832L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe (AR)For Respondent: Shri Ravindra Sindhe (DR)
Section 22Section 23Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(c)

…. 85 per sq. ft. per month( average of the rate) and calculated the ALV of the property at Rs. 10,87,113/- (Rs.15,15,018/- minus Municipal Tax Rs. 4,65,905/-). However, the ld. CIT(A) relying upon the decision of ITAT, Mumbai in ITO vs. Chem Mech (P) Ltd. viz 83 ITD 427 Mumbai, directed the AO to compute the ALV in term of percentage of the investment in property. Ld. AR of the assessee argued that the method adopted by authority below is wrong. Ld. AR for assessee further relied upon the case of CIT vs. Tip Top Typography (2014) 48 taxmann.com 191 (Bombay). Ld. DR relied upon the order of authorities below. 3…

Vinod Harbanslal Kheterpal, Thane vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 46, Mumbai

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

ITA 2739/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz (Am) & Shri Sandeep Gosain (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Ms. Usha GopalanFor Respondent: Shri. Vivek Batra
Section 143(3)Section 23(4)(b)Section 24(1)Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JASON P. BOAZ (AM) AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (JM) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vinod Harbanslal Kheterpal, The ACIT Central Circle- 46, 601, M.V. Everest Bldg, Mumbai. Off L.B.S.Marga, Opp. Thanewala Garage, Vs. Thane (W)- 400601. PAN: ABDPK1556F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Usha Gopalan Respondent by : Shri. Vivek Batra Date of Hearing: 17/03/2016 Date of Pronouncement: 30/03/2016 O R D E R PER JASON P. BOAZ, AM This Appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(Appeals)-38, Mumbai dt. 21/02/2014 for…