← 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

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 535/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

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 ... 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 assessments, iii. the addition was made vide an order u/s 153A

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 470/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

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 ... 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 assessments, iii. the addition was made vide an order u/s 153A

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 469/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

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 ... 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, ii. iii. the addition was made vide an order u/s 153A

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 468/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

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

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

concealment of 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; 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 assessments, iii. the addition was made vide

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 467/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

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 ... 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 assessments, iii. the addition was made vide an order u/s 153A

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

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 466/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

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 ... 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, ii. iii. the addition was made vide an order u/s 153A

Raju Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 248/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 246/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 247/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 248/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Raju Mohan Gurnani V/S. Ito, Central Circle 5(2) बिधम Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-410209 East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpg9103B Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana

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

income, by ld. AO of Rs. 91,360/- being 100% of the tax on notional income of Rs. 3,91,467/- 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; i. AO had failed to re-compute 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 assessments iii. the addition was made

Raju Mohan Gurnani, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Circle 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 247/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 246/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 247/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 248/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Raju Mohan Gurnani V/S. Ito, Central Circle 5(2) बिधम Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-410209 East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpg9103B Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana

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

income, by ld. AO of Rs. 91,360/- being 100% of the tax on notional income of Rs. 3,91,467/- 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; i. AO had failed to re-compute 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 assessments iii. the addition was made

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

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 246/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rahul Chaudhary & Smt. Renu Jauhriआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 246/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2014-15) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 247/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2015-16) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 248/Mum/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2016-17) Raju Mohan Gurnani V/S. Ito, Central Circle 5(2) बिधम Flat No. 2101, Moraj Casa Room No. 427, 4Th Floor, Grande, Plot No. 57, Sector Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra 17, Koperkhairne Kurla Complex, Bandra Maharashtra-410209 East, Maharashtra-400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aalpg9103B Appellant/अपीलधर्थी .. Respondent/प्रनिवधदी निर्ााररती की ओर से /Assessee By: None रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By: Shri R. R. Makwana

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

income, by ld. AO of Rs. 91,360/- being 100% of the tax on notional income of Rs. 3,91,467/- 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; i. AO had failed to re-compute 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 assessments iii. the addition was made

Classic Mall Development Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 6(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5320/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.A. Dhyani, CIT DR &
Section 143(3)Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)

concept of annual value as being the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year, i.e., annual letting value (ALV). However, in case of let out property, the concept of annual rent has been removed. The new section provides that where the property ... Section 22 charges the income to tax under the head ‘Income from House property’. Section 23 provides the mechanism to compute the annual letting value (ALV) of the property. Section 23(1)(a) provides for determining the ALV at a sum for which the property might reasonably 9 Classic Mall

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4700/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in Novartis India Ltd. accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in some

DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4699/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in Novartis India Ltd. accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in some

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4574/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in Novartis India Ltd. accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in some

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 4573/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in Novartis India Ltd. accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in some

ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai vs. Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross

ITA 7799/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon'Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in accordance with law laid down by Hon'ble Bombay High Court in some of the cases

Novartis India Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 7(1), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of assessee and revenue and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms

ITA 7733/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Mar 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang, Hon’Ble & Shri B R Baskaran, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C Kanojiya, CIT-DR

recovered. The AO however took the view that the recovery of actual costs incurred on those premises is not relevant and the Annual letting value has to be computed and assessed under the head Income from house property. The AO noticed that the annual letting value was determined ... notional rental income is required to be assessed. 15.5 However, we notice that the AO has adopted adhoc rate for determining the Annual letting value. We notice that the said methodology is not in Novartis India Ltd. accordance with law laid down by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in some

Allied Finance P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

ITA 3277/DEL/1996[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2025AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 143(3)

before us. The earlier learned coordinate bench’s order dated 17.07.2000 appears to have restored the instant sole issue between the parties i.e. annual letting value “ALV” of the house property in question, back to the Assessing Officer, as per the “Municipal Corporation” valuation. The matter thereafter travelled

Allied Finance P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Delhi

ITA 3761/DEL/1994[1990-91]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Mar 2025AY 1990-91

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

Section 143(3)

before us. The earlier learned coordinate bench’s order dated 17.07.2000 appears to have restored the instant sole issue between the parties i.e. annual letting value “ALV” of the house property in question, back to the Assessing Officer, as per the “Municipal Corporation” valuation. The matter thereafter travelled

DCIT Central Circle-4 (1), Mumbai vs. Oberoi Realty Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 5128/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 23(5)

Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co Ltd [2013] 354 ITR 180 (Del). Also in order to arrive at the annual letting value of the property, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Radha Devi Dalmia ... Limited, Mumbai 2. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in restricting the annual letting value to 2.5% to the tune of Rs. 1,83,15,286/- as against Rs. 5,12,82,802/- made

Oberoi Realty Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4803/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar,ARFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani (Sr. DR)
Section 143(3)Section 22Section 23Section 23(5)

Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing Co Ltd [2013] 354 ITR 180 (Del). Also in order to arrive at the annual letting value of the property, reliance was placed on the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Radha Devi Dalmia ... Limited, Mumbai 2. “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in restricting the annual letting value to 2.5% to the tune of Rs. 1,83,15,286/- as against Rs. 5,12,82,802/- made