sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
 M/s A Daga Royal Arts vs. ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
 Gagan Infraenergy Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 PCIT vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Mangammal @ Thulasi vs. T.B. Raju (Supreme Court)
 Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)

Meena Rani Arora,201, Vipps Centre, 2-Community Centre, Masjid Moth, GK-II, New Delhi. Vs. ACIT, Central Circle-22, New Delhi.
October, 16th 2014
                DELHI BENCHES : E : NEW DELHI


                        ITA No.393/Del/2013
                     Assessment Year : 2008-09

Meena Rani Arora,                 Vs.   ACIT,
201, Vipps Centre,                      Central Circle-22,
2-Community Centre,                     New Delhi.
Masjid Moth, GK-II,
New Delhi.


     (Appellant)                           (Respondent)

              Assessee By     :    Shri Sanat Kapoor, Advocate
              Department By   :    Shri Gunjan Prashad, CIT, DR



       This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order

passed by the CIT (A) on 19.11.2012 in relation to the assessment

year 2008-09.

2.     The only issue raised through various grounds is against the

estimation of annual letting value (ALV) of the Shimla property at

                                                     ITA No.393/Del/2013

3.   Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee

had two house properties, one situated at Delhi and the other at

Shimla in the previous year relevant to the assessment year

under consideration.     The Assessing Officer called upon the

assessee to furnish details of their location and usage, which the

assessee did not. As the assessee had not offered any income

from house property, the AO required the assessee to explain as

to why annual letting value (ALV) of one of these two properties

be not assessed on notional basis. In the absence of any reply

given by the assessee, the AO estimated ALV of the property at

Shimla at `1,80,000/-. After allowing statutory deduction u/s 24

@30%, he computed `Income from house property' at `1,26,000/-.

No relief was allowed in the first appeal.

4.   After considering the rival submissions and perusing the

relevant material on record, it is observed that the assessee

unsuccessfully tried to build a case before us about the Shimla

property being not in inhabitable state requiring no determination

of ALV. No evidence worth the name has been placed on record

in support of such contention.     It is seen from the submissions

                                                        ITA No.393/Del/2013

made before the ld. CIT(A) that the assessee, apart from making

the above submission, also contended that the ALV should be

estimated at a lower rate. This belies the claim of non-habitable

condition of the Shimla property. However, it is discernible from

the assessment order, that the AO         estimated the ALV of this

property at `1,80,000/- without any basis whatsoever. The ld. AR

undertook to extend full cooperation to the AO if the matter of

computation of the ALV of such property was restored for fresh

adjudication. Under such circumstances, we are of the considered

opinion that the ends of justice would meet adequately if the

impugned order on this issue is set aside and the matter is

restored to the file of AO. We order accordingly and direct the AO

to determine the ALV of Shimla property as per law, after allowing

a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee.

5.    In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.

      The order pronounced in the open court on 14.10.2014.

           Sd/-                                         Sd/-

      [RAJPAL YADAV]                              [R.S. SYAL]
     JUDICIAL MEMBER                          ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Dated, 14th October, 2014.

                                  ITA No.393/Del/2013


Copy forwarded to:

     1.   Appellant
     2.   Respondent
     3.   CIT
     4.   CIT (A)
     5.   DR, ITAT

                           AR, ITAT, NEW DELHI.

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
Customer relationship management software CRM software Operational CRM Collaborative CRM

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions