The ITAT allowed the appeal in part. The Tribunal held that the...

The ITAT allowed the appeal in part. The Tribunal held that the AO's and CIT(A)'s addition of deemed rent for five Mumbai flats was unsustainable because the assessee had bona fide intention to let and took efforts to rent the properties, thus attracting s.23(1)(c) relief; Ground No.1 allowed. Ground No.2 was dismissed: the office at Hariom Chambers was properly held chargeable to tax under Income from House Property because the assessee did not carry on a business/profession chargeable to tax under profits and gains. Alternatively, Ground No.3 was allowed: the assessee may designate Hariom Chambers as self-occupied and treat Ruby Villa as deemed let, and the AO is directed to recompute income from house property accordingly.