https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120534 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, granting the claimed vacancy allowance of Rs. 1,14,31,200 under section 24(1)(ix) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal determined that the building, being a single commercial entity with common facilities, qualified for the vacancy allowance for portions that remained vacant. The ITAT set aside the CIT(Appeals) decision, emphasizing that "property is let" should include properties intended for letting out, aligning with precedents in Premsudha Exports and Kamal Mishra v. ITO. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Dec 2023 11:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120534 The ITAT allowed the assessee's appeal, granting the claimed vacancy allowance of Rs. 1,14,31,200 under section 24(1)(ix) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal determined that the building, being a single commercial entity with common facilities, qualified for the vacancy allowance for portions that remained vacant. The ITAT set aside the CIT(Appeals) decision, emphasizing that "property is let" should include properties intended for letting out, aligning with precedents in Premsudha Exports and Kamal Mishra v. ITO. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120534