Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

110 ITD 158Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2008#2836 most cited

What is Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

For the purpose of computing income from house property, the annual value under Section 23 must be determined even if the property is vacant or not actually let out, as the statutory phrase "property is let out" does not necessitate actual letting.

41

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT · Premsudha Exports · Section 23 · Section 23(1)(a) · Section 23(1)(c) · Annual Letting Value · ALV · notional rent · vacant property · property not actually let out · income from house property · determination of annual value

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 23(1)(c)Section 143(3)Section 23Section 139(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 22Section 131

Issues it is cited on

section 23(1)(c)self occupied propertysection 23(1)section 23(1)(a)section 80lsection 23(2)annual letting valuesection 23(4)section 23(5)annual valuesection 2(31)interest on interest

Judgments citing Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

Aveo Real Estate Holdings Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 2 (1)(4), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed in terms of paragraph 9

ITA 6852/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak
Section 23(1)(c)

…upation. ITA. No. 6852 & 6853/Mum/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 1.4 The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not considering the judicial precedents as laid down by the jurisdictional Hon‟ble Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports P. Ltd. Vs. ACIT(2008) (110 ITD 158) and Hon‟ble Bangalore Tribunal in case of S.M. Chandrashekhar Vs. Income Tax Officer (2016) (76 taxmann.com 278), which squarely applies to the Appellant‟s case.” 6. The Ld. Authorised Representative for the Appellant appearing before us submitted that the property comprising of the area of 1,88,035 Sq. Ft. (hereinafter referred to as „the Leas…

Shri Kamal Kumar, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the impugned orders are set aside

ITA 2003/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmash. Kamal Kumar Vs. Acit, 13, Ashoka Avenue Road, Central Circle-26, E-2, Dlf Farms Chattarpur, Room No. 323, Ara Centre, New Delhi Jhandewalan, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 153ASection 23(1)(c)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250(6)

…rd to certain aspects of existing buildings which were not considered to be in accordance with the municipal laws. He relied the judgment of Hon’ble Mumbai ITAT in Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 10, [2008] 110 ITD 158 (Mum.) to contend that the phrases “property is let” as appearing in Section 23(1)(c) of the Act has been appropriately interpreted by the Mumbai Bench while holding that the phrases “property is let” does not mean actual letting of a property and if the property is left out unlet during any part or whole of the previous year due to circumstances…

Suman P Khurana, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Circle-3(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 2415/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2415/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Suman P. Khurana बिधम/ Acit, Central Circle-3(2) Room No.402, 4Th Floor, 501, Raheja Centre, Free Press Vs. Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Mumbai-400021. Karve Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.S स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aahpk0190Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee By: Shri Shekhar Gupta Revenue By: Shri Hoshang B. Irani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 24/01/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/04/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 21.02.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -51, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2012- 13. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: - “1. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Estimating The Annual Value Of The Property At Maker Chambers Iv, Nariman Point, Mumbai At Rs.82,86,301/- As Against Nil Declared By The Assessee & Denying The Exemption Claimed U/S 23(1)(C) By The Assessee. A.Y. 2012-13 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On The Facts Of The Case In Estimating The Value Of The Property At Gujranwala Town, Delhi At Rs.6,60,000/- As Against Nil Declared By The Assessee & Denying The Exemption Claimed U/S 23(1)(C) By The Assessee.

For Appellant: Shri Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Hoshang B. Irani
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 2415/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Suman P. Khurana बिधम/ ACIT, Central Circle-3(2) Room No.402, 4th Floor, 501, Raheja Centre, Free Press Vs. Journal Marg, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Mumbai-400021. Karve Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.s स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAHPK0190Q (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Shri Shekhar Gupta Revenue by: Shri Hoshang B. Irani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing: 24/01/2…

Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - 14 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5081/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon. & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon.M/S. Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle-14(3)(2), Plot No. 219, Laalasis, 11Th Mumbai Road, Chembur, Mumbai.

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Bairagra, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…nal in the case of viz. (i). Vikas Keshav Garud Vs. ITO, Ward 1(2), Nashik (2016) 160 ITD 7 (Pune) (ii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del); (iii). Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 10, Mumbai (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum); and (iv). Informed Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum). We find that in the case of Informed technologies India Ltd. (supra) the Tribunal after deliberating at length on the issue as regards the scope and gamut of Sec. 23(1)(c) of the Act, had observed as under : “ “7.1 We have considered the rival submiss…

Surpreet Singh Suri, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 6, New Dlehi

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

ITA 6536/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 6536/Del/2018 : Asstt. Year : 2014-15 Surpreet Singh Suri, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of Income C/O Sanjiv Sapra & Associates Tax, Central Circle-6, Llp, Chartered Accountants, New Delhi C-763, New Friends Colony, New Delhi-110025 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aohps9046K Assessee By : Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, Fca Revenue By : Sh. S. S. Rana, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.08.2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 24.09.2019 Order Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar:

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjiv Sapra, FCAFor Respondent: Sh. S. S. Rana, CIT DR
Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)Section 234ASection 24

…assessee could not get a right tenant in spite of the having best intention to let out the same. Hence, the ALV of the property was taken as Nil. The assessee has quoted the following case laws in support of his arguments: " Premsudha Exports P. Ltd. Vs ACIT 110 ITD 158 (ITAT Mumbai) " Smt. Indu Chandra Vs DCIT in ITA No. 96/Lkw/2011 3 Surpreet Singh Suri " Smt. Shankuntala Devi Vs DCIT in " ACIT Vs Dr. Prabha Sanghi 139 ITD 504 (ITAT Delhi) 5. He argued that the ld. CIT (A) has not been able to distinguish these judgments and has merely denied the vacancy allowance as available u/s 23(1)(c) of the Act on the g…

Dilip Kumar Chowdhary, Howrah vs. ACIT, Circle - 46, Kolkata

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

ITA 2460/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy] I.T.A. No. 2460/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dilip Kumar Chowdhary………….…………………………....………………..……………..……….….Appellant 545, G.T. Road (South) 6Th Floor Howrah – 711 101 [Pan : Acdpc 4418 P] Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-46, Kolkata……........................…...Respondent Appearances By: Shri S.S. Gupta, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Sankar Haldar, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue.

Section 22Section 23(1)(c)Section 250

…been determined at nil having regard to the fact the property could not be let out and remained vacant for the whole year. In support of this proposition, decisions of the Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. & Presmshree gems (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT, 110 ITD 158 (Mum-Trib.) and Shakuntala Devi vs. DDIT in ITA No.1524/Bang/2010 order dated 20.12.2011 were relied upon before CIT(A). We notice from the order of the CIT(A) that the property was actually let out in the financial year 2006-07 to M/s IDBI Home Finance Ltd. at an actual rental value of Rs.12,600/- per month i.e. Rs.1,51,200/- per annum. During t…

Ms. Priyananki Singh Sood, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed

ITA 6698/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri U.N. Marwah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 23(1)(A)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24

…ITA No. 6698/Del/2015 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES: ‘G’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SMT. BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AY: 2012-13 Ms. Priyananki Singh Sood vs. ACIT 2nd Floor, EROS Cinema Building, Circle 52(1) Jangpura Extension, New Delhi. New Delhi PAN No. AODPS0629C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri U.N. Marwah, CA Department by : Shri Shailesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 11/12/2018 Date of Pronouncement: 13/12/2018 ORDER PER BEENA A PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 26/10/15 pass…

Sonu Realtors P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 66/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2892 /Mum/2016 & Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – 14(3)(2) Plot No. 219, Laalasis, Mumbai 11Th Road, Chembur, Vs. Mumbai 400 071. Pan – Aaacs7073C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.P Bairagra Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement :19.09.2018 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12 & A.Y 2012-13 Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-22, Mumbai, Dated 22.01.2016 & 27.09.2016. As A Common Issue Is Involved In The Aforementioned Appeals, Thus, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off Together By Way Of A Consolidate Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12. The Assessee Assailing The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Has Raised Before Us The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri. J.P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…he year in the same. Further, the ld. A.R in order to support his aforesaid interpretation of Sec. 23(1)(c), relied on the following orders of the coordinate benches of the Tribunal: (i). Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 10, Mumbai (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum). (ii). Informed Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT-3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum) Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-14(3)(2), Mumbai 5 ITA No. 2892/Mum/2016 & ITA No. 66/Mum/2017 A.Ys 2011-12 & 2012-13 (iii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del) In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions, it…

Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(3)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2892/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Soodita No. 2892 /Mum/2016 & Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Dcit – 14(3)(2) Plot No. 219, Laalasis, Mumbai 11Th Road, Chembur, Vs. Mumbai 400 071. Pan – Aaacs7073C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. J.P Bairagra Respondent By : Shri Rajat Mittal Date Of Hearing : 05.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement :19.09.2018 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, Jm The Present Appeals Filed By The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12 & A.Y 2012-13 Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Passed By The Cit(A)-22, Mumbai, Dated 22.01.2016 & 27.09.2016. As A Common Issue Is Involved In The Aforementioned Appeals, Thus, The Same Are Being Taken Up & Disposed Off Together By Way Of A Consolidate Order. We Shall First Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee For A.Y 2011-12. The Assessee Assailing The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Has Raised Before Us The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

For Appellant: Shri. J.P BairagraFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 143(2)Section 22Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…he year in the same. Further, the ld. A.R in order to support his aforesaid interpretation of Sec. 23(1)(c), relied on the following orders of the coordinate benches of the Tribunal: (i). Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle 10, Mumbai (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum). (ii). Informed Technologies India Ltd. Vs. DCIT-3(2), Mumbai (2017) 162 ITD 153 (Mum) Sonu Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT-14(3)(2), Mumbai 5 ITA No. 2892/Mum/2016 & ITA No. 66/Mum/2017 A.Ys 2011-12 & 2012-13 (iii). ACIT, Circle-47(1), New Delhi Vs. Dr. Prabha Sanghi (2012) 139 ITD 504 (Del) In the backdrop of his aforesaid contentions, it…

Sri Paul Christadas Salins, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 853/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2018AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Lokesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abdul Hakeem .M, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 23(1)Section 23(1)(c)Section 24aSection 24b

…contention, he placed reliance on the following Tribunal decisions. Page 3 of 6 A) Smt. Shakuntala Devi Vs. DDIT in ITA No. 1524/Bang/2010 dated 20.12.2011, copy available on pages 33 to 38 of paper book. B) Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT as reported in 110 ITD 158 (Mum), copy available on pages 39 to 45 of paper book. C) Shri Vikas Keshav Garud Vs. ITO in ITA No. 747/PN/2014 dated 31.03.2016, copy available on pages 47 to 52 of paper book. 4. Regarding various judgements noted by CIT(A) in his order, he submitted that these judgements are not applicable in the facts of the present case. He also submitted…

Can Properties Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ITO 9(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4797/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Can Properties Pvt. Ito-9(2)(1), Ltd., Shop No. 13, Lumbini Mumbai-400020 बनाम/ Palace Chs Ltd., 91, Tejpal Vs. Road, Ville Parle East, Mumbai – 400 057 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aadcc 7832 L

Section 23(1)(c)Section 51

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ, म ुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “SMC” BENCHES, MUMBAI श्री जोगगन्दय स िंह, न्मायमक दस्म Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Can Properties Pvt. ITO-9(2)(1), Ltd., Shop No. 13, Lumbini Mumbai-400020 बनाम/ Palace CHS Ltd., 91, Tejpal Vs. Road, Ville Parle East, Mumbai – 400 057 (यनधाारयती /Assessee) (याजस्व /Revenue) P.A. No. AADCC 7832 L यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee by Dr. P. Daniel – AR याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by Ms. N. Hemalatha -DR ुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 13/02/2018 आदेश की तायीख /Date of Order: 13/…

Monisha R. Jaising, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 24 & 26, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7578/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am श्री महाविर स िंग, न्याययक दस्य एििं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा दस्य के मक्ष

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A TharFor Respondent: Shri Ravjisingh Arneja
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…cant throughout the previous year, the actual rent received/receivable being NIL, the annual value of the flat is to be taken at NIL. This view, it is contended, is supported by the ratio of the order of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports P Ltd (110 ITD 158 Mum). In this regard it hasa to be stated that the Andhra Pradesh High Court has taken a contrary view in the case of Vivek Jain vs. ACIT (337 ITR 74 [AP]). The Andhra Pradesh High Court has observed that the provisions of Sec. 23(1)(c) are attracted if i) property or any part thereof has been let; ii) it has been vacant during the whole or any p…

Monisha R. Jaising, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 24 & 26, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 7577/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am श्री महाविर स िंग, न्याययक दस्य एििं श्री राजेश कुमार, ऱेखा दस्य के मक्ष

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A TharFor Respondent: Shri Ravjisingh Arneja
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

…cant throughout the previous year, the actual rent received/receivable being NIL, the annual value of the flat is to be taken at NIL. This view, it is contended, is supported by the ratio of the order of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Premsudha Exports P Ltd (110 ITD 158 Mum). In this regard it hasa to be stated that the Andhra Pradesh High Court has taken a contrary view in the case of Vivek Jain vs. ACIT (337 ITR 74 [AP]). The Andhra Pradesh High Court has observed that the provisions of Sec. 23(1)(c) are attracted if i) property or any part thereof has been let; ii) it has been vacant during the whole or any p…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1576/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-20,…

The ACIT., New Delhi vs. M/S. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1254/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-20,…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1248/DEL/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-20,…

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT CC-20, New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year 2006-07 is hereby allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3193/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Mar 2017AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction Acit, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Acit, Central Circle-20, Ansal Housing & Construction New Delhi. Ltd., Ugf-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan : Aaaca 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri S. K. Jain, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 32Section 35DSection 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2004-05 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 Ansal Housing & Construction ACIT, Central Circle-20, Ltd., New Delhi. UGF-15, Indraprakash Bldg., Vs. 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. PAN : AAACA 0377 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2005-06 ACIT, Central Circle-20,…

Informed Technologies India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 6467/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu () & Shri Ravish Sood ()

For Appellant: Shri Surinder MehraFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)

…ions of clause(c) of section 23(1) of the Act the income from the said property is to be assessed at Nil. c) That the C.I.T.-(A) has erred in completely ignoring the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai, in the case of Premsudha Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 110 ITD 158 which was brought to his notice in the detailed facts of the case filed before him during the course of hearing along with copy of judgment. d) That in view of the said decision of the ITAT, Mumbai, income from the said property is to be assessed at Nil. e) That the C.I.T.-(A) has erred in referring to the judgment in the case of Vivek Jain vs. A…

Informed Technologies India Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2), Mumbai

ITA 6466/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu () & Shri Ravish Sood ()

For Appellant: Shri Surinder MehraFor Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)

…ions of clause(c) of section 23(1) of the Act the income from the said property is to be assessed at Nil. c) That the C.I.T.-(A) has erred in completely ignoring the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai, in the case of Premsudha Exports Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 110 ITD 158 which was brought to his notice in the detailed facts of the case filed before him during the course of hearing along with copy of judgment. d) That in view of the said decision of the ITAT, Mumbai, income from the said property is to be assessed at Nil. e) That the C.I.T.-(A) has erred in referring to the judgment in the case of Vivek Jain vs. A…

S.M. Chandrashekar, Bangalore vs. ITO, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1060/BANG/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Dr.K. Shankar Prasad, JCIT (D.R)
Section 23(1)(c)Section 50C

…id case, one of us (AM) is the signatory. In the case of Smt. Indu Chandra (supra), addition which was made in similar circumstances, was deleted by following the decision of the ITAT, Mumbai Bench ‘C’ in the case of Premsudha Exports (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT (2008) 110 ITD 158 (Mum) and the relevant findings have been given in para 11 and 11.1 of the order dated 29.4.2011 which are reproduced as under : “11. After" considering the submissions of both the parties and the material on record, it is noticed that the property in question remained vacant and claim of the assessee was that she made all the efforts to let out…