← All Phrases

“Section 23(1)(a)”

Section References (mined)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)98 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 23(1)(a) is CIT v. Tip Top Typography (368 ITR 330), cited in 161 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 23(1)(a)

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. Neha Builders Pvt. Ltd.
296 ITR 661 · 2008 · High Court
129
citing judgments

Income from unsold flats held as stock-in-trade by a builder or developer is assessable as business income, not income from house property, for assessment years prior to the insertion of Section 23(5) of the Income-tax Act.

CIT v. Sridev Enterprises
192 ITR 165 · 1991 · High Court
125
citing judgments

Interest expenditure on borrowed funds, especially when used for making advances, should generally be allowed under Section 36(1)(iii) if its nature and business expediency remain consistent with previous assessment years. The character of an outstanding amount at the start of an accounting year is considered the same as at the end of the prior year, reinforcing the rule of consistency.

CIT v. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.
341 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
108
citing judgments

The Legislature abolished terminal depreciation under section 32(1)(iii) and the taxing of balancing charge under section 41(2), replacing these provisions with the requirement to reduce sale proceeds of depreciable assets from the block of assets.

Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT
386 ITR 500 · 2016 · Supreme Court
89
citing judgments

If an assessee company's main business object is to acquire and rent out properties, the rental income derived is taxable as 'Profits and gains of business or profession', rather than 'Income from house property', as the nature of the activity constitutes a business.

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. Gujarat Power Corporation Ltd.
352 ITR 583 · 2013 · High Court
80
citing judgments

Disallowance under Section 14A for interest expenditure is not justified if an assessee uses its own interest-free funds for investments generating exempt income, and borrowed funds are entirely utilized for business purposes, without evidence of diversion to earn tax-free income.

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.

Judgments citing Section 23(1)(a)

Deputy Commissioner Ofincome Tax -23(1), Mumbai vs. Laxmi Finance and Leasing Company Co-Op. Society Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 4232/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2024AY 2014-15
Section 23(1)(a)

adopt the Municipal rateable value for computation of ALV without appreciating the fact that AO has determined the ALV on the basis of Section 23(1)(a) of the I.T. Act, 1961 i.e. sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to Ict from year to year 3 Whether ... facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in not applying of the provisions of section 23(1)(a), 23(1)(b), 23(1)(c) of the I. T. Act 1961. 5 Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case

DCIT-CC-4(2), Mumbai vs. Raheja Universal Private Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4847/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Respondent: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, CA
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 22Section 23(1)(a)Section 250

during the assessment proceedings that the Assessee-Company has not offered any rent with respect to these properties held as unsold inventories under section 23(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Ansal Housing Finance & Leasing ... property is treated as the value at which the property might reasonably be expected to be let out during the year as per section 23(1)(a) of the IT Act. Thus, the rental income of the assessee which escaped assessment is worked

Kandhari Infrastructures Private Limited, Chandigarh vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 710/CHANDI/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off. 4. That The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Is Erroneous, Arbitrary, Opposed To The Facts Of The Case & Thus Untenable.”

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 24ASection 24B

out/sold and basis thereof as so claimed by the assessee and basis thereof, the matter has to be examined in context of section 23(1)(a) for the purposes of determining the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to be let out during the financial year relevant

Sunil Ramnarayan Mantir, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 206-17

ITA 92/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

grounds:- “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.52,83,945 towards deemed rent by applying the provisions of section 23(1)(a) to the property at Devs Arcade Mall, Ahmedabad owned by the appellant without appreciating that the provisions of section 23(1)(c) were ... therefore, even if it is assumed that the said property was vacant for the whole of the current year, still the provisions of section 23(1)(c) were AYs 2016-17 & 2017-18 attracted in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble ITAT, Pune in M/s. Classic Citi

Sunil Ramnarayan Mantri, Jalgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Jalgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the AYs 206-17

ITA 91/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jun 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(1)(c)

grounds:- “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs.52,83,945 towards deemed rent by applying the provisions of section 23(1)(a) to the property at Devs Arcade Mall, Ahmedabad owned by the appellant without appreciating that the provisions of section 23(1)(c) were ... therefore, even if it is assumed that the said property was vacant for the whole of the current year, still the provisions of section 23(1)(c) were AYs 2016-17 & 2017-18 attracted in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble ITAT, Pune in M/s. Classic Citi

ACIT-3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Gentex Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 196/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Parwani, Sr. DR

from year to year. The actual receipt of rent was irrelevant. By the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 w.e.f. 1.4.1976, Section 23(1)(b) was introduced, whereby it was provided that if the actual rent received by an assessee is in excess of the sum for which, the property might ... taken as the annual value of the property". 27. From the aforesaid Circular, it is clear that the law prior to introduction of section 23(1)(b)was that annual value was equal to Municipal Valuation of the property. The above circular gives an indication as to how the expression

DCIT 14(1)(1), Mumbai, Aayakar Bhawan vs. Neelkanth Urban Developers Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 2408/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Mar 2024AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(5)

closing stock of flats/shops/offices should not be brought to tax as income from house property in hands of the Assessee as per Section 23(1)(a) of the Act. In response, the Assessee filed reply letter, dated 18/12/2019, contending that notional rental income in respect of units forming part ... made addition of INR 1,77,89,901/- as income from house property in the hands of the Assessee invoking provisions of Section 23(1)(a) of the Act. 4. Being aggrieved, the Assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). It was contended that the provisions for levying

Kushal Das Dayaram Manghanani, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 486/HYD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Mar 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2014-15 Kushal Das Dayaram Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Manghanani, Circle – 5(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Agbpm9633N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri M.V. Joshi, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. Ar. 20.03.2024 Date Of Hearing: Date Of Pronouncement: 22.03.2024

For Appellant: Shri M.V. Joshi, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)(a)Section 250Section 263

declare rental income for AY 2014-15, claiming it was leased to his son without rent due to business difficulties. As, Section 23(1)(a) mandates deemed rental income, the order of Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) was deemed erroneous, leading to a 263 order for reassessment by the PCIT ... respond. Hence, an amount of Rs.48,96,000/- (as per AY 2013-14) was taken as the annual deemed rental value under section 23(1)(a) for this assessment. Accordingly, the assessment was completed by adding Rs. 34,27,200/- as income from house property to the total income

Bharat Dewakinandan Agarwal, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-13, Pune.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 884/PUN/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri V.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 23(1)Section 23(1)(a)Section 24

proceeded to determine the gross annual value for property No. 801 in accordance with the conditions laid down in clause (a) of Section 23(1) of the Act. Accordingly, the net income for property No. 801 determined at Rs.15,47,489/- by giving deductions on account of taxes to local ... that the expression “the sum for which the property might be expected to be let out from year to year” as provided in Section 23(1)(a) of the Act does not mean the rent received in preceding years or the rent received for similar premises, but the rent receivable

Sai Builders and Developers, Vashi vs. PCIT-27, Vashi

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

ITA 1916/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyalsaibuildersanddevelopers, Vs Pr.Cit-27, B12,Ashiana,Plotno.15, Roomno.401, Sector17,Vashi, 4Thflr,Towerno.6, Navi Mumbai-400703. Vashi Railway Stationcomplex,Vashi, Navimumbai-400703. Pan/Gir No. : Abbfs0092C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.K.Gopal&Shri.OmKandalkar.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Hiren M Bhatt. Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

taxability of annual value under the head "Income from House Property". a. Annual value for the purpose of section 22as per the section 23(1)(a) shall be deemed to be the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year. b. Since there

Kanti Thermo Equip Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 6(3)(2), Mumbai

ITA 3039/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (Jm)

Section 23Section 23(1)(c)Section 23(4)Section 24Section 57

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “E” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Aby T. Varkey (JM

Gonuguntla Nirmala Devi, Anantapur vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 1, Anantapur

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

ITA 455/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(3)Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 68

taken by the Assessing Officer towards vacant portions cannot be regarded as the reasonable expected rent as per the provisions of section 23(1)(a) of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above grounds, that the Ld.CIT(A) ought to have directed the Assessing Officer to take Municipal Rentable

DCIT-6(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Aasan Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2710/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhaasan Corporate Vs. Dcit, Circle 6(1)(1) Solutions Private Limited 563B, 5Th Floor, 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower Aayakar Bhavan, Annexe, Ganpatrao Kadam Maharishi Karve Road, Marg Lower, Parel Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aajca7980P Appellant .. Respondent Dcit, Circle 6(1)(1) Vs. M/S Aasan Corporate Room No. 504, 5 Th Floor, Solutions Private Limited Araykar Bhavan 4Th Floor, Piramal Tower M.K. Road, Annexe, Ganpatrao Mumbai – 400 020 Kadam Marg Lower, Parel Mumbai – 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Aajca7980P Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ronak Doshi A/W Priyank Gandhi Respondent By : Ajay Chandra Date Of Hearing 21.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 05.01.2024

For Appellant: Ronak doshi a/wFor Respondent: Ajay Chandra
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 40

P a g e | 1 ITA No.1968 & 2710/Mum/2023 Aasan Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 6(1)(1) IN

Aasan Corporate Solutions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT Circle 6(1)(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1968/MUM/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Amarjit Singhaasan Corporate

For Appellant: Ronak doshi a/wFor Respondent: Ajay Chandra
Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 40

Page 1 ITA No. 1968 & 2710/Mum/2023 Aasan Corporate Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, Circle 6(1)(1) IN THE INCOME

M/S Peringattu Health Foundation Private, Ernakulam vs. ITO Corporate Ward 2(3), Kochi

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 23/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am &Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathi Ammal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 12Section 143(3)Section 22Section 24(1)(b)

23(1)(a) is to be compared. Why, the words “is let” and “actual rent” occur in both clauses, (b) & (c), of section 23(1). The same, which are to be accordingly read in the same manner, signify that the provisions contemplate actual letting. The words “received or receivable” following ... assessed at it’s annual value, defined as the rent reasonably expected on being let from year to year (s. 23(1)(a)). Sections 23(1)(b) and (c) provide for adjustment to the said value on account of actual rent, received or receivable, being either higher or lower

M/S. Neelkanth Mansion and Infrastrucutre Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 14(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 442/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Neelkanth Mansions & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd 5Th Floor, Fine House, Anandji Lane, M.G. Road, Ghatkopar (E) Mumbai- 400 077 Pan: Aaacn1245R ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit, Circle 14(1) (1) 4Th Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Mumbai- 400020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Pratik MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, SR. AR
Section 10Section 14ASection 23(1)(a)Section 250

Company is involved in the business of builders and developers. During the assessment proceedings AO made additions on account of section 14A and section 23(1)(a) of the Act amounting to Rs. 16,41,923/- and Rs. 95,22,574/- being notional rent chargeable to tax (@ 8% on closing ... order u/s. 250 of the Act, deleted the addition 3 M/s. Neelkanth Mansion & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd. made by the AO on account of section 23(1)(a) of the Act amounting to Rs. 95,22,574/- being notional rent chargeable to tax (@ 8% on closing stock of unsold flats/shops

Coronate Constructions, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

ITA 1024/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 288A

unsold stock (held as stock in trade) farming part of the inventory should have been brought to tax as deemed rent under section 23(1)(a) of the Act, whereas the assessee has neither offered deemed rent of unsold flats nor the AO brought the same

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax -27(3), Mumbai vs. 3 Nn Corporation, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2302/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Ms. Renu KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263

Ansal Housing Financing & Leasing Co. Ltd. (supra), wherein it is held that the flats lying unsold as closing stock as ALV under section 23(1)(a) of the Act can be taken and assessed as income from house property, another decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case

Gurpreet Singh Dhillon, Amritsar vs. ACIT, Circle Int. Tax. 1(2)(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2673/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

Section 23Section 24Section 251(2)

observe that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Asian Hotels Ltd. (supra) held as under:- “Para 9. Section 23(1)(a) is relevant for determining the income from house property and concerns determination of the annual letting value of such property. That provision talks ... admitted position that there is a specific provision in the Wealth-tax Act which provides for considering of a notional interest whereas section 23(1)(a) contains no such specific provision. “ 11. We also observe that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar

Vinay Bhasin, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 61(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 164/DEL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2016-17]

Section 23Section 23(1)(a)Section 23(4)

assessee. The Assessing Officer treated the same as residential house property of the assessee and calculated notional rent as per provisions of Section 23(1)(a) of the Act with respect to all the other three properties. While doing so the Assessing Officer had taken support of the case laws