“Section 23(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 23Section 23(4)87 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 23(4) is Keshav Mills Ltd. v. CIT (23 ITR 230), cited in 86 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 23(4)

Keshav Mills Ltd. v. CIT

23 ITR 230 · 1953 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Income taxability depends on the real nature of the receipt and actual or constructive receipt of income, not merely on book entries. An amount is only "deemed to be received" if explicitly provided by the Income Tax Act, not by an assessee's unilateral intention.

CIT v. Bhaskar Mitter

73 Taxmann 437 · 1994 · High Court

citing judgments

The annual letting value of a property can be determined at a figure lower than that returned by the assessee if the returned value is not in accordance with the principles for determining annual letting value under section 23. Assessees can contend for a value based on the correct application of law.

Smitaben N. Ambani v. CWT

323 ITR 104 · 2010 · High Court

citing judgments

The annual value of a self-occupied property, for both wealth tax and income tax purposes, is the reasonable rent expected from a hypothetical tenant. When using municipal ratable value, statutory deductions permissible under municipal law must be added back to arrive at this expected rent.

CIT v. Sane & Doshi Enterprises

377 ITR 165 · 2015 · High Court

citing judgments

Rental income from unsold property held by a real-estate developer is assessable under the head 'Income from House Property' and not as 'Business Income'. The treatment in books of account as stock-in-trade does not alter the income's character for tax purposes.

CIT v. Gundecha Builders

102 Taxmann.com 27 · 2019 · High Court

citing judgments

The deemed rental value of unsold flats held as stock-in-trade is covered by Section 23(4)(b), and a subsequent amendment provided relief for unsold flats by making their annual value NIL for two years from the end of the financial year of obtaining the completion certificate.

CIT v. Neha Builders (P.) Ltd.

164 Taxmann 342 · 2007 · High Court

citing judgments

When a builder's business involves constructing and selling property, unsold units are considered stock-in-trade and income derived from them is taxable under the head 'Business Income', not 'Income from House Property'.

M.V. Sonavala v. CIT

177 ITR 246 · 1989 · High Court

citing judgments

The Assessing Officer can determine the annual value of a property based on what it might reasonably be let for from year to year or its annual ratable value, especially when rent is not charged or is below market rates. This approach is permissible under Section 23(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act.

291 ITR 500 (SC) (paras 4, 12) CIT v. Sharma (H. P.)

122 ITR 675 · 1980 · High Court

citing judgments

The annual value of a property is its annual letting value. This is determined by the rent it would fetch if let out, even if it is self-occupied.

Judgments citing Section 23(4)

Anand Jhawar, Jaipur vs. PCIT, Jaipur-2, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 156/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Poonia, CA &For Respondent: Shri Shailendra Sharma, CIT &

Section 12ASection 138Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 263

judicial proceedings. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and 3 Shri Anand

Rekha Ajaykumar Agrawal, Surat vs. Assistant Commissioner O Income Tax, Cir.1(2), Surat

ITA 356/SRT/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat30 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपील सं./Ita No.356/Srt/2022 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2015-16) (Virtual Court Hearing) Rekha Ajaykumar Agrawal Assistant Commissioner Of 229-230, Ashoka Tower, Ring Income-Tax, Circle-1(2), Aayakar Vs. Road,Surat-395002 Bhavan, N. Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil Hospital, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaspa 2993 A (Assessee ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh C Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kuamr, Sr-D.R

Section 143(3)Section 23(2)Section 23(4)Section 24Section 56(2)(vii)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM &DR. A.L.SAINI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA

DCIT 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Toshiba Johnson Elevators India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 488/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Akhtar Ansari, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. M.P. Lohia, CA &

Section 12ASection 138Section 250Section 271GSection 273BSection 92C

apply ; (iv) that the period from March 15, 2020 till February 28, 2022 also to be excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section

Mora] Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 155/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

situation, the annual value of such house or part of the house is required to be taken as 'Nil". [Para 9] According to section 23(4)(a), where the property referred to in section 23(2) consists of more than one (A.Ys: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13) MorajFinanz Corporation ... house, then section 23(2) is to apply only in respect of one of such houses and section 23(4)(b) provides that the annual value of the house or houses, other than the house in respect of which the assessee had exercised an option under section 23(4

Moraj Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. Dclt Central Cirle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 154/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

Moraj Finanz Corporation, Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle - 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above direction

ITA 153/MUM/2022[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 22

DCIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Shri Mohit Keepak Kamboj, Mumbai

ITA 4285/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alcpk2213Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri P. R. Mane

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 23Section 68

Self-occupied Property and Juhu property as the deemed let out property at his discretion. However, as per the provisions of section 23(4)(a) of the Act, the assessee has the option to choose the property that should be considered as Self-occupied Property in a case where ... opportunity to exercise the said option during the assessment proceedings has exercised the option as per the provisions of section 23(4)(a) during the appellate proceedings to treat the Juhu property as the Self- occupied Property. Consequently, the Worli property has to be treated A.Ys

ACIT Cir-6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Shri Mohit Deepak Kamboj, Mumbai

ITA 801/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri P. R. Mane

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 23Section 68

DCIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. Mohit Deepak Kamboj, Mumbai

ITA 6384/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.4285/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6384/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Dcit-4(3)(1) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak Room No. 649, 6Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- A-15, Venus Co-Op. 400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018. & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.801/Mum/2018 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Acit, Cir-6(3)(2) बिधम/ Shri Mohit Deepak R. No. 522, 5Th Floor, Kamboj Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. A-15, Venus Co-Op. Road, Mumbai-400020. Society, R. G. Thandani Marg, Mumbai-400018 स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Alckp2213G (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Satyaprakash Singh Revenue By: Shri P. R. Mane सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 15/07/2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/09/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm:

For Appellant: Shri Satyaprakash SinghFor Respondent: Shri P. R. Mane

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 23Section 68

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 3025/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhshri Rakesh Kumar Vs. Acit, Central Circle 5(4) Wadhawan, Room No. 1927, 19Th Thar & Co., 203, Capri Floor, Air India Building, Building, Opp. Hdil Nariman Point, Towers, Anant Kanekar Mumbai – 400 021 Marg, Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(4)Section 234D

ITA No.3025/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 1 Shri Rakesh Kumar Wadhawan Vs. ACIT, CC-5(4) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE

Yash Vardhan Arya, Bangalore vs. The Income Tax Officer, (International Taxation) Ward-1(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 203/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)

relevant material on record. The Assessing Officer has assessed the annual value of the house in question by applying the deeming provisions of section 23(4) of the Act that if the house is not self-occupied then it shall be deemed to be the sum for which the property ... only in the case where the property is already let out and there is a vacancy in between then the deeming provision of section 23(4) r.w.s. 23(1) shall also be understood that in case of vacancy of the property in between from the initial letting out, it will

Saif Ali Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi, Mumbai vs. ACIT 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is allowed

ITA 7152/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri K.K. LalkakaFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Thakur

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(c)Section 23(4)(b)Section 250

operative Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as „the House Property‟) was computed at INR 81,08,802/- as per provisions of Section 23(4)(b) read with Section 23(1) of the Act taking 7% of the value of the House Property ... flat amounting Rs. 11,58,40,022/-. Therefore, annual value of the property is taken at Rs. 81,08,802/- as per section 23(4)(b) r.w.s. 23(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961.” ITA. No. 7152/Mum/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 4. Being aggrieved, the Appellant carried this issue

Pegasus Properties P. Ltd., Pune vs. Dy CIT, CC-2(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 943/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajan VoraFor Respondent: Shri Dhramveer Singh

Section 153Section 153ASection 153CSection 22Section 23Section 23(4)

making notional addition to the income of the Appellant under the head Income from House Property (IFHP) of ₹.92,09,165 under section 23(4) of the Act, on account of deemed rental income on unsold flats held as stock in trade; 3. erred in upholding that, deemed rental income ... deemed rental income on unsold stock of properties lying as ‘stock in trade’ under the head ‘income from house property’. The provisions of Section 23(4) of the Act are meant only for properties that are held as investments and not as stock in trade. We find that decision rendered

M/S. Madanthyar Primary Agricultural Credit Co-Operative Society(Previously Known As Madanthyar Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Madanthyar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Smt. Prathibha R, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Susan D. George, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 201Section 206CSection 234E

shall apply.  It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Section 23(4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of Section