M.V. 2 Shri Janak Dilip Dwarkadas Sonawala v. CIT

246 ITR 177High Court#20077 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2019.

Judgments citing M.V. 2 Shri Janak Dilip Dwarkadas Sonawala v. CIT

Asst CIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Janak Dilip Dwarkadas, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5024/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Sandeep Gosain (Jm)

Section 14A

…ing value of property at 8% of the cost of the property and the same resulted in an addition of Rs. 4,21,694/-. The Learned CIT(A) followed the decision rendered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M.V. 2 Shri Janak Dilip Dwarkadas Sonawala Vs. CIT (246 ITR 177), wherein it was held that income from house property has to be computed on the basis of sum received by the property let out year to year and at municipal value and directed the AO to determine the Annual Letting Value by adopting Municipal Rateable value. 3. The Assessing Officer also noticed that the assessee has earned exempt income, but did…

Asst CIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Iqbal M Chagla, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5593/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Asstt. Commissioner Of Shri Iqbal M. Chagla, Income-Tax-16(2), C Block, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 440, 4Th Floor, Pallonji Mansion, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Vs. New Cuffe Parade, Colaba, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400005 Pan: Aabpc2830K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh (Dr) Assessee By : Ms. Aarti Sathe( Ar) Date Of Hearing: 17/08/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 17/08/2018

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Sathe( AR)For Respondent: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar Singh (DR)

Section 143Section 14A

…s of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) was justified in directing to the compute the ‘Income from House Property on the basis of ‘Municipal Rateable Value’ placing reliance on the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M V Sonavala Vs CIT 246 ITR 177 (Bom) [HC] where the issue was Assessment Year: 2011-12 whether the actual compensation received or the municipal rateable value should be taken as the annual value (ALV) whereas in the instant case the issue is whether Municipal Rateable Value, even if it does not give the correct fair rent should be taken as Annual Value in case of self-occupi…

Asst CIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Janak Dilip Dwarkadas, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4845/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Sunil M Lala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Virendra Singh, DR

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

…le value. The CIT(A) observed in Para 4.2 as under: - “4.2 This issue was considered by CIT(A) in A.Y. 2011-12 in para 3 of the order which is held as under: "When we consider jurisdictional High Court's decision in identical issue of M. V. Sonawala vs. CIT 246 ITR 177(Bom.) where it is held that income from house property has to be computed on the basis of sum received by the property let out year to year and "municipal rateable value". This decision was taken by the Bombay High Court after following the decision of Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT v. Prabhawati Ehausal where it is held that in the case…

Asst CIT 16(2), Mumbai vs. Janak Dilip Dwarkadas, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 5200/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आिकर अपील सं./Ita No. 5200/Mum/2015 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2011-12) The Asst. Cit 16(2), Vs. Shri Janak Dilip Dwarkadas, Room No. 479, 4Th Floor, 3Rd Floor, Mulla House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.G. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400001 M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 स्थािी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaepd8303R (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia (DR)

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

…sessee made disallowance @ 0.5% as per rule 8D (2)(iii), amounting to Rs. 51,30,492/. 3. The assessee challenged the assessment order before the Ld. CIT (A). The Ld. CIT (A) following the order of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court passed in M.V. Sonawala Vs. CIT 246 ITR 177 (Bom) directed the AO to make computation of income from house property on the basis of municipal ratable value and directed the AO to compute the value accordingly. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of Rs. 51,30,492/-made u/s 14A read with Rule 8 of the Income Tax Rules, relying on the decision of ITAT Mumbai in the case of ACIT 11(2) vs.…