← All Phrases

“Section 23(4)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 23Section 23(4)(a)10 judgments

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

Leading authorities on Section 23(4)(a)

Keshav Mills Ltd. v. CIT
23 ITR 230 · 1953 · Supreme Court
86
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
52
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
44
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
38
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
31
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
30
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
27
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
14
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)(a)

Mukul Rohatgi, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle 61(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2427/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

For Respondent: Shri Sachit Jolly, Senior Advocate
Section 112ASection 143(3)Section 144BSection 14ASection 24Section 263

same. The PCIT further observed that the assessee has claimed Nil ALV in terms of Section 23(2)(a) read with Section 23(4)(a) of the Act but, for the purpose of Section 23(2)(a) of the Act, the actual occupation of the property for self-residence

Ravi K Sheth, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax -5(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1907/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Ravi K Sheth Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Kalyaniwalla & Mistry Llp , Income Tax -5(3)(1), Esplanade House, 2Nd Floor, Mumbai Vs. 29, Hazarimal Somani Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400001 (Pan : Aaips7341E) (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.M. Golvala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(4)

building "Manek" was also considered by the assessee as self- occupied property but treated as deemed let out property as per section 23(4)(b) of the Act. Thus, the house property at Nagaon and the Flat No. 12B in building "Manek" are used by the assessee

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-19(1), Mumbai vs. Jaswant Jayantilal Shah, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1479/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon'Blei.T.A. No. 1479/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Lavanya Rajouhrohit, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna, CIT D/R
Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 23Section 23(4)(a)Section 23(4)(b)Section 250(4)Section 41(1)

account of notional rent in respect of two premises, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has exercised an option under Section 23(4)(b) of the Act, when assessee possessed more than one house? 4. The appellant craves, leave to amend or alter any grounds ... shop at Ahmedabad and found that the assessee has not offered income from house property regarding the same. Invoking the provisions of Section 23(4)(b) of the Act, the AO was of the firm belief that the annual value of the house or houses other than the house

Deepak Kantilal Shah, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-19(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1423/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Jm) & Shri Girish Agrawal (Am)

Section 143(3)Section 24

appellate proceeding, appellant has repeated his contention which was placed before the AO during assessment proceeding. Appellant contended that as per section 23(4)(a) of the Act he has an option to choose one house property as self-occupied property (SOP) and the other property as deemed ... shall be determined under sub-section (1) as if such house or houses had been let." It is undisputed facts that as per section 23(4)(a) appellant can choose one house property as self-occupied property at his option. But at the same time, it is pertinent to note

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

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. 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

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

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

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

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

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