TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds Assessee's appeal on house property income computation, emphasizing judicial discipline</h1> <h3>The ACIT-5 (1), Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai Versus M/s. Gagan Trading Co. Ltd. and vice-versa</h3> The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed the Assessee's appeal regarding the computation of income from house property. The Tribunal upheld ... Computation of income from house property - CIT(A) directing the AO not to take the notional interest on interest free deposit while computing the let out value of the property for computation of income from house property - Held that:- The issue is fully covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2006-07 modify the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to accept the income from house property declared by the assessee adopting the municipal ratable value as annual letting value of its property. - Decided in favour of assessee. Issues:1. Appeal by Revenue against CIT(A)'s order regarding computation of income from house property.2. Appeal by Assessee against the same order.Analysis:1. The Revenue's grievance was the CIT(A) directing the AO not to consider notional interest on interest-free deposit while computing the let out value of the property for income from house property. The AO added notional interest on a security deposit, resulting in a higher income calculation. However, the CIT(A) adjusted this computation significantly lower. The assessee's counsel cited previous Tribunal decisions favoring the assessee, while the Departmental Representative referred to High Court decisions. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, citing previous Tribunal decisions and judicial discipline to follow precedent. Consequently, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the assessee's appeal was allowed.2. The Tribunal noted that the issue was settled in favor of the assessee based on previous Tribunal decisions. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of judicial propriety and discipline in following established judicial pronouncements. By following the findings of a co-ordinate Bench, the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal and allowed the assessee's appeal. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, resulting in the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal and the allowance of the assessee's appeal.
TaxTMI 
