TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (2) TMI 523
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pman, sweepers, liftman of Rs. 89,100 and Rs. 20,300 respectively and electricity charges of Rs. 41,764 being expenses incurred for electric burning for pump motor, common passage and lift. Though the said expenditure were in the nature of obligatory expenses on part of your appellant to earn rental income and for contractual obligation to the tenants and therefore being in the nature of direct charge against rental income itself under s. 22 of the Act and the learned CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the said addition on the ground that no such expenditure can be allowed under s. 24 of the Act. 2. Your appellant further submits that Hon'ble CIT(A) has further erred in giving a direction to the learned AO to follow order of Hon'ble ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; (Amount in Rs.) (1) Salary of sweepers pumpman and liftman 89,100 (2) Bonus of sweepers, pumpmen and liftman 20,200 (3) Electric burning for pump motor and 41,764 common passage -------- &nbs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resentative, on the other hand, relied on the orders of the lower authorities, claiming the same to be in conformity with the relevant provisions of the Act as well as the settled law in the matter as explained by the Courts time and again. 5. We have heard the parties and perused the material on record. 5.1 The Act mandates a particular head for each type of income, so that the same has necessarily to be assessed under the said head and in the manner provided under the relevant chapter. As such, the assessee's contention of being contractually obliged to bear the said expenditure under the relevant (rent) agreement would be of no moment; the assessee being entitled to claim only the deductions as enumerated under s. 24 of the Act in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d expenditure in the computation of the income under the said head of income only in terms of its provisions, would not be entitled to the impugned deductions, we consider that the annual value of its house property be assumed at the reduced value, i.e., after deducting the impugned amounts (from the rental), being only in relation to the expenditure required to be necessarily incurred for the enjoyment/user of the relevant property and, therefore, can only be considered as having been included at the said amount, i.e., at cost, by the two parties in the reckoning/determining of the same (rental). We decide accordingly. 5.3 In this context we may also add that the standard deduction admissible to the assessee on account of repairs @ 1/6t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arties. However, we find, firstly, that the assessee has not raised the said ground before the learned CIT{A), even though the impugned order states of the same having been raised in appeal before him vide ground No. 2, so that it is not clear as to how the same arises for adjudication by him. Secondly, this issue could also not possibly be raised by the assessee as the AO has himself assessed the said income received by way of additional rent by the assessee under s. 22 of the Act. No doubt, it is within the competence of the first appellate authority to assume jurisdiction in respect of any matter, whether raised before him or not, qua the assessment which is under appeal before him, but that would necessitate that the assessee is properl....