← All Phrases

“annual letting value”

Income HeadsSection 23Section 23238 judgments

The decision most relied on for annual letting value is Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT (373 ITR 673), cited in 381 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on annual letting value

Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. v. CIT
373 ITR 673 · 2015 · Supreme Court
381
citing judgments

Income from immovable property, such as unsold flats or shops, held by an assessee as stock-in-trade in their business of acquiring and holding properties is taxable as 'business income' and not 'income from house property'. Consequently, notional annual letting value under Section 23 cannot be attributed to such stock-in-trade.

CIT v. Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co. Ltd.
354 ITR 180 · 2013 · High Court
208
citing judgments

Annual Letting Value (ALV) of unsold stock-in-trade flats/shops held by a real estate developer can be assessed under Section 22 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as income from house property. This approach was followed by the Assessing Officer (AO) based on this decision.

CIT v. Tip Top Typography
368 ITR 330 · 2014 · High Court
161
citing judgments

For computing income from house property, the Annual Letting Value (ALV) cannot be arbitrarily estimated by the Assessing Officer, but must be determined based on the Municipal ratable value of the property.

CIT v. Moni Kumar Subba
333 ITR 38 · 2011 · High Court
78
citing judgments

Notional interest on an interest-free security deposit cannot be considered as actual or deemed rent under Section 23(1) of the Act. For determining Annual Letting Value (ALV) under Section 23(1)(a), it must be in accordance with municipal laws, considering extraneous circumstances, but not exceeding the standard rent as per rent control legislation.

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.

Premsudha Exports (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT
110 ITD 158 · 2008 · ITAT
41
citing judgments

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.

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.

Judgments citing annual letting value

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 196/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.2627/िद"ी/2013(िन.व. 2008-09) आअसं.1695 और 1696/िद"ी/2016(िन.व. 2009-10 और 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain & Ms. Manisha Sharma, Advocates &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 80I

Directors meeting Fee; & (iv) Directors traveling expenses. B. Ground no. 5 of appeal: Addition of Rs.64,98,414/- on account of Notional Annual letting Value of unsold vacant flats and commercial spaces held as stock in trade. C. Ground no. 6 to 9 of appeal are general in nature ... order of Tribunal needs reconsideration. 4.3. With regard to issue raised in Ground of appeal no. 5 relating to determination of Notional Annual Letting Value of residential units held as stock in trade, the ld. Counsel fairly stated that this issue has been decided against the assessee

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 195/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.2627/िद"ी/2013(िन.व. 2008-09) आअसं.1695 और 1696/िद"ी/2016(िन.व. 2009-10 और 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain & Ms. Manisha Sharma, Advocates &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 80I

Directors meeting Fee; & (iv) Directors traveling expenses. B. Ground no. 5 of appeal: Addition of Rs.64,98,414/- on account of Notional Annual letting Value of unsold vacant flats and commercial spaces held as stock in trade. C. Ground no. 6 to 9 of appeal are general in nature ... order of Tribunal needs reconsideration. 4.3. With regard to issue raised in Ground of appeal no. 5 relating to determination of Notional Annual Letting Value of residential units held as stock in trade, the ld. Counsel fairly stated that this issue has been decided against the assessee

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2627/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआअसं.2627/िद"ी/2013(िन.व. 2008-09) आअसं.1695 और 1696/िद"ी/2016(िन.व. 2009-10 और 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain & Ms. Manisha Sharma, Advocates &For Respondent: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 80I

Directors meeting Fee; & (iv) Directors traveling expenses. B. Ground no. 5 of appeal: Addition of Rs.64,98,414/- on account of Notional Annual letting Value of unsold vacant flats and commercial spaces held as stock in trade. C. Ground no. 6 to 9 of appeal are general in nature ... order of Tribunal needs reconsideration. 4.3. With regard to issue raised in Ground of appeal no. 5 relating to determination of Notional Annual Letting Value of residential units held as stock in trade, the ld. Counsel fairly stated that this issue has been decided against the assessee

Bindumalyam Panduranga Allanharinarayan, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 107/BANG/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Sri Bharadwaj Sheshadri, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 23Section 250Section 44A

confirming the order of the AO and all the additions made by him except with respect to the relief of annual letting value on self-occupied property. 14,80,788 2. The CIT(A) ought to have quashed the assessment order on the ground that it went beyond the scope ... limited scrutiny initiated. 14,80,788 3. The CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of annual letting value of Rs.3,76,327 with respect to the Purvankara flat. 1,33,728 4. The CIT(A) erred in holding that the maintenance charges of Rs.59,23,126 received from

ITO, Ward-16(3), New Delhi vs. Mauve Star Developers P.Ltd, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6467/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Naveen Chandraincome Tax Officer Vs. Mauve Star Developers Ward 16(3) Private Limited Room No. 304, U-7, Ground Floor, C.R. Building, Green Park Extn. New Delhi - 110002 New Delhi – 110048 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aahcm2402N Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Katosh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 16Section 23Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 68

impugned order held that provisions of sections 22 and 23 would be applicable and assessee would be liable to pay tax on annual letting value of unsold flats as income from house propertyWhether Special LeavePetition filed against impugned order was to be granted - Held, yes . AR also contended that flat

Galaxy Developers, Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT., Circle-7(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1445/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Karan Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23(5)Section 250Section 270A

conditions laid down in section 22 of the Act. In absence of any fair rental value provided by the assessee, the AO computed annual letting value (ALV) at 7% of the closing stock value, aggregating to Rs. 15,62,713/-, and after allowing standard deduction of 30%, made an addition ... they were not used for any business or professional purposes during the relevant year. The AO thus proceeded to apply a notional Annual Letting Value (ALV) at 7% of the book value of the unsold units and taxed the resulting figure under section 22, allowing standard deduction

ACIT Circle-2(2), New Delhi vs. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 6673/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ansal Housing Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Ansal Circle-2(2), Housing & Construction Ltd.), New Delhi 606, 6Th Floor, Indra Prakash, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. M/S. Ansal Housing & Circle-2(2), Construction Ltd., New Delhi 15, Ugf, Indraprakash Building, 21 Barakhamba, Cp, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Manisha Sharma, Adv. Sh. Jitendra Bhati, Ca Department By Sh. Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 43C

erred in upholding the addition of Rs.65,83,703/- made by AO under the head 'Income from House Property' on account of notional annual letting value in respect of unsold vacant flats and commercial space held as stock in trade by the company. 1.1 That on the law, facts

Ansal Housing Ltd (Formerly Known As M/S Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd.), New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-2(2), New Delhi

ITA 6626/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ansal Housing Ltd. Vs. Acit, (Formerly Known As M/S. Ansal Circle-2(2), Housing & Construction Ltd.), New Delhi 606, 6Th Floor, Indra Prakash, 21, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. M/S. Ansal Housing & Circle-2(2), Construction Ltd., New Delhi 15, Ugf, Indraprakash Building, 21 Barakhamba, Cp, New Delhi Pan: Aaaca0377R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv. Ms. Manisha Sharma, Adv. Sh. Jitendra Bhati, Ca Department By Sh. Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 23Section 43C

erred in upholding the addition of Rs.65,83,703/- made by AO under the head 'Income from House Property' on account of notional annual letting value in respect of unsold vacant flats and commercial space held as stock in trade by the company. 1.1 That on the law, facts

Vinod Kohli, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle 35(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 896/DEL/2021[2012 - 2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2025

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Ms. Monalisa Maity, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 148(2)Section 292B

property located at / in R.C Mall, Moradabad (U.P.). Therefore, there is no occasion on the part of the Ld. AO to determine the annual letting value of such properly. The Ld. AO has taken annual let-table value at Rs.3,30,000/- on an arbitrary basis without having any reasoning

Radial International Mining Services Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Pr, CIT (Central), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1651/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 22Section 263

queries and had not provided any documentary evidence called for. As far as taxing of income pertaining to house property is concerned, the annual letting value of any property owned by a company is required to be taxed under section 22. Where the property is shown to be used

Ramesh Dungarshi Shah, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Inocme Tax, Circle-3, Mumbai

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

ITA 1220/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Shri. Girish Agarwal, Am Ramesh Dungarshi Shah Deputy Commissioner Of Income 108, Shreedhar Apartment, Maulana Tax, Circle – 3, Kalyan Vs. 2Nd Floor, Rani Mansion, Murbad Azad Road, Dombivali, East, Thane – 421201. Road, Kalyan West – 421301. Pan/Gir No. Aavps0931K (Assessee) : (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri. Devendra Jain, Adv. (Virtually) : Shri. Asif Karmali (Sr. Dr) Respondent By : 14.02.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 14.05.2025 O R D E R Per Kavitha Rajagopal, J M: This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Challenging The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Delhi (‘Ld. Cit(A)’ For Short), National Faceless Appeal Centre (‘Nfac’ For Short) Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act'), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (‘A.Y.’ For Short) 2015-16. 2. It Is Observed That The Assessee Has Filed This Present Appeal With A Delay Of 47 Days Beyond The Period Of Limitation For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condoning The Delay Along With The Reasons Specified For The Delay. After Hearing The Rival Contentions, We Deem It Fit To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal For The Reason That There Was ‘Sufficient Cause’ & Bonafide Reasons For The Delay. Delay Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri. Devendra Jain, Adv. (Virtually)For Respondent: 14.02.2025
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(4)(b)Section 23(5)Section 250

further observed that for the properties which were held as stock-in-trade and not let during the year under consideration, the notional annual letting value u/s. 23 is to be determined even when the insertion of the clause (5) of Section 23 was w.e.f. 01.04.2018 applicable prospectively, it held ... properties held as stock-in-trade would be taxable on the basis of 6 Ramesh Dungarshi Shah notional annual letting value u/s. 23of the Act. The relevant extract of the said decision is cited herein under for ease of reference: “9. Furthermore there is no dispute that the effect

Padam Chand Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 35(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 7418/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Padam Chand Gupta, Vs. Assistant Commissioner 1-C Court Road Civil Lines Of Income Tax, Income Tax Delhi 110054 Circle 35(1) New Delhi Pan No. Aanpg5120C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23

respect of premises leased out by maintenance and other charges paid bu assessee were to be deducted from rent while computing assessee, annual letting value of said property In favour of assessee) The assessee had leased out its premises to five tenants. Lease agreements were entered into in this behalf ... maintenance and other charges were paid by the assessee, it was rightly held to be deductible from the rent while computing the annual letting value. 7.1 We also find in the case of M/s. Suman Didwania Vs. ACIT (supra), Hon'ble Tribunal has held as under: "3. We have heard

Sukhram Bhagwandas Kandhari, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 1(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1101/MUM/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai (Jm) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (Am) Sukhram Bhagwandas Kandhari Ito 1(2)(1) Brillanto House, Plot No. 61 Aayakar Bhavan Road No. 13, Chakala Midc Vs. M.K. Road Mumbai-400 093. Churchgate Mumbai-400 020. Pan : Aadpk4772C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh ThakwaniFor Respondent: Shri Haridas Bhat

while completing the assessment. Similarly, it was pleaded that the appellant has got good case with regard to the addition made on annual letting value of self occupied property. In view of the same, it was requested that one 2 Sukhram Bhagwandas Kandhari opportunity may be give to explain

Rajni Chauhan, Agra vs. DCIT Centre Circle, Agra

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 150/AGR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Agra28 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.150/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Smt. Rajni Chauhan Dcit – Central Circle बनाम/ Sec-47, Moti Katra Agra Vs. Agra 282003 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aqwpr-3516-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Deepender Mohan (Ca) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. Cit Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

For Appellant: Shri Deepender Mohan (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain – Ld. CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

assessee stated that no property was let out during the year. The assessee also pleaded for vacancy allowance. However, Ld. AO computed Annual Letting Value (ALV) @7% of investment barring one shop which was treated as self- occupied property. After granting statutory deduction of 30%, the income of Rs.13.02 Lacs

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Centeral Circle 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 439/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector 17, Koperkhairne, Maharashtra-400709 V/S. बनाम Ito Central Circle 5(2) Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

being 100% of the tax on income of Rs.4,01,727 on the notional income of Rs. 2,03,727/-representing the annual letting value and undisclosed income of Rs. 1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect ... search assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A ignoring that; i. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT, and was yet to give effect to the order of ITAT ii. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessmentsthe

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 438/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector 17, Koperkhairne, Maharashtra-400709 V/S. बनाम Ito Central Circle 5(2) Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

being 100% of the tax on income of Rs.4,01,727 on the notional income of Rs. 2,03,727/-representing the annual letting value and undisclosed income of Rs. 1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect ... search assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A ignoring that; i. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT, and was yet to give effect to the order of ITAT ii. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessmentsthe

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 437/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17)

For Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

being 100% of the tax on income of Rs.4,01,727 on the notional income of Rs.2,03,727/-representing the annual letting value and undisclosed income of Rs.1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of a search assessment ... r.w.s.153A ignoring that: i. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT, and was yet to give effect to the order of ITAT ii. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessmentsthe addition was made vide

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Centeral Circle 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 436/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani V/S. Ito Central Circle 5(2) Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne, Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-400709 East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

being 100% of the tax on income of Rs.4,01,727 on the notional income of Rs. 2,03,727/-representing the annual letting value and undisclosed income of Rs. 1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect ... search assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A ignoring that; i. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT, and was yet to give effect to the order of ITAT ii. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessmentsthe

Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 435/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 435/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2010-11) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 436/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2011-12) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 437/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2012-13) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 438/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2013-14) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 439/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2016-17) Mohan Thakurdas Gurnani V/S. Ito Central Circle 5(2) Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne, Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-400709 East, Maharashtra-400051 बनाम स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aacpg8827D Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee By: None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 12.03.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 28.03.2025 आदेश / Order Page 2

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana
Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 275

being 100% of the tax on income of Rs.4,01,727 on the notional income of Rs. 2,03,727/-representing the annual letting value and undisclosed income of Rs. 1,98,000 determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect ... search assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A ignoring that; i. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT, and was yet to give effect to the order of ITAT ii. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessmentsthe

Priyaa Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 536/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275

income, by Id. AO of Rs. 49,219/- being 100% of the tax on notional income of Rs.2,27,625/- representing the annual letting value determined by AO and further erred in levying penalty u/s 271(1)(c) in respect of a search assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s.153A ignoring that ... viii. ix. x. xi. xii. xiii. xiv. AO had failed to recompute the Annual Letting Value as per the direction of ITAT and was yet to give effect to the Order of ITAT. provisions of S. 271(1)(c) were inapplicable to the case of search assessments, the addition