TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (11) TMI 280
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....answered: "Whether the ITAT, in the facts and circumstances of the case, was right in upholding the deletion of the additions made by the Assessing Officer with respect to the annual letting value of the property in question?" 3. The Assessing Officer in the assessment order for three assessment years has observed and held that premises/portion of property No.74-75, Scindia House, New Delhi was let out by the respondent to one A-One, Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd. on a monthly rent of Rs.3,000/- per month. 4. During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1997-98, information was received from the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 25(1), New Delhi under whose jurisdiction A-One, Travel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ir respective hands depending upon the rental income received by them. 6. Revenue preferred appeals but the Tribunal has not agreed with their contention and their stand. Tribunal has held that A-One Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. was an independent entity and it was not the case of the Assessing Officer that the lease between the respondent and A-One Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. was a device to avoid tax. A-One Travels and Tours Pvt. Ltd. was entitled to sub-let the premises and they had exercised said right. 7. We have heard the counsel for the appellant Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Sr. Standing counsel and examined factual matrix as recorded by the tribunal and the legal issue raised in the present appeal. There is no appearanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....equal to the aggregate of- (i) in respect of any residential unit whose annual value as so determined does not exceed six hundred rupees, the amount of such annual value; (ii) in respect of any residential unit whose annual value as so determined exceeds six hundred rupees, an amount of six hundred rupees ; (b) in the case of a building comprising one or more residential units, the erection of which is begun after the 1st day of April, 1961, and completed after the 31st day of March, 1970, but before the 1st day of April, 1978, for a period of five years from the date of completion of the building, be reduced by a sum equal to the aggregate of- (i) in respect of any residential unit whose annual value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eeds three thousand six hundred rupees, an amount of three thousand six hundred rupees, Explanation 1:- For the purposes of this sub-section, "annual rent" means- (a) in a case where the property is let throughout the previous year, the actual rent received or receivable by the owner in respect of such year ; and (b) in any other case, the amount which bears the same proportion to the amount of the actual rent received or receivable by the owner for the period for which the property is let, as the period of twelve months bears to such period. Explanation 2:- For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where a deduction in respect of any taxes referred to in the first proviso to this sub-sect....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....td. from their tenant, which was a transaction at arm's length and not a transaction between sister concerns or related persons. 11. Section 23 of the Act has been interpreted by a Full Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Moni Kumar Subba (2011) 333 ITR 38 (Del) (FB). In the said decision it has been observed: "16. Since the provisions of fixation of annual rent under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act are pari materia of Section 23 of the Act, we are inclined to accept the aforesaid view of the Calcutta High Court in Satya Co. Ltd. (supra) that in such circumstances, the annual value fixed by the Municipal Authorities can be a rationale yardstick. However, it would be subject to the condition that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o actual market rent received was not approved by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Satya Co. Ltd.[(1997) 140 CTR (Cal) 569] and categorically rejected in the following words: "There is no mandate of law whereby the AO could convert the depression in the rate of rent into money value by assuming the market rate of interest on the deposit as the further rent received by way of benefit of interest-free deposit. But s. 23, as already noted, does not permit such calculation of the value of the benefit of interest-free deposit as part of the rent. This situation is, however, foreseen by Schedule III to the WT Act and it authorises computation of presumptive interest at the rate of 15 per cent. as an ....