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>Determining Property Value: Actual Rent vs. Expected Rent</h1> <h3>Jaldhara Trading & Properties P. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax</h3> Jaldhara Trading & Properties P. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax - TMI Issues:Assessment of annual value of property based on rent and interest-free deposit.Analysis:The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai dealt with two appeals filed by an assessee against orders of Ld. CIT-(A)-4, Mumbai for assessment years 2006-07 and 2008-09. The common issues involved the estimation of the annual value (ALV) of a property let out by the assessee to a tenant. The property was rented to a bank at a monthly rent of Rs. 15,000/- and an interest-free deposit of Rs. 2,75,00,000/- was accepted. The Assessing Officer (AO) calculated the ALV by adding the rent received and notional interest on the deposit. The CIT(A) disagreed with the AO's approach, citing legal precedents, and determined the ALV based on the rent the property could fetch in the open market. The assessee challenged this decision before the Tribunal.The Tribunal considered a similar case involving comparable facts and legal interpretations by a co-ordinate bench in the case of ITO Vs. M/s Tip Top Typography. The Tribunal referred to the legislative intent behind section 23(1)(b) and clarified that the actual rent received should represent the ALV if higher than the expected rent. It also discussed the decision of the Delhi High Court regarding notional interest on deposits and the relevance of municipal valuations in determining ALV. The Tribunal emphasized that when the actual rent declared by the assessee exceeds the ratable value fixed by municipal authorities, there is no reason to doubt the declared rent. Therefore, the AO was directed to consider the rent actually received by the assessee as the ALV, as it exceeded the municipal valuation.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed both appeals of the assessee, emphasizing the importance of considering the actual rent received when determining the ALV of a property. The judgment provided clarity on the legal principles governing the assessment of property income and highlighted the significance of municipal valuations and actual rental income in such assessments.
TaxTMI 