TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (10) TMI 532
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ase, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,57,500/-- as income from Vijay Guest House. The appellant prays that, estimate made be deleted. (b) The learned assessing officer and the CIT(A) has estimated income from the Guest House, which is contrary to the facts and evidence on record and hence it should be deleted. (c) The learned CIT(A) erred in observing that, the appellant has not given details and evidence. The learned assessing officer and the CIT(A) erred in estimating occupancy rate and charges per day without any details being brought on record which is based on conjectures and being arbitrary the same should be deleted. (d) The appellant prays that, the addition of Rs. 1,57,500/- be deleted. Without prejudice, the estimate of income being on higher side it be reduced. 3. (a) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in making addition uls.l4A of Rs.l,56,763/- and CIT(A) erred in confirming the same, which addition be deleted. (b) The learned assessing officer, failed to appreciate that, the provisions of section 14A are not attracted and the addition made be deleted. The appellant prays that, the addit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ated at Bangroli village, Maval Taluka, Lonavala District. It appears, the assessee has not declared any rental income from this property. The Assessing Officer, after considering reply submitted by the assessee during the assessment proceedings has estimated the property's ratable value at Rs. 36,000/- p.a. He has also allowed the standard deduction @ 30% on this amount. The assessee during the appellate proceedings has stated that the property could not be let out during the year and it was lying vacant. He further submitted that the municipal taxes paid on this property were only Rs. 3,050/- p.a. Considering the municipal taxes paid at 1j3rd of the total rental income earned during the year the rent that would have been received works out to Rs. 9,150/- and submitted that the Assessing Officer had taken unreasonably high value while estimating the property income. It is seen from the facts on record that the assessee relied only on the municipal taxes paid as basis for estimation of rental income. This .cannot be a measure to estimate ALV of the property, since, for the purpose of valuation of the property tax the assessee ought to have given the monthly/annual rental income....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....apidated condition having 6 rooms and Rs. 125/- per day per person was being charged as the tariff. However, the Assessing Officer, as the information submitted by the assessee, in his opinion, was not satisfactory he estimated rent per day per person at Rs. 300/-. He has also taken the occupancy rate at 75% and accordingly he estimated Rs. 4,93,200/- as rent received from the guest house. During the appellate proceedings the assessee submitted that the Assessing Officer while estimating the income at Rs. 4,93,200/- has not brought any material on record but decided the issue on surmises and imagination. In addition to this, the assessee also submitted the electricity bills paid by the assessee in respect of the above mentioned guest house in support of his claim that the occupancy rate of the guest house during the relevant period was not to the extent of 275 days as mentioned by the Assessing Officer. I have considered the facts of the case and details submitted by the assessee and found that neither the Assessing Officer nor the assessee could conclusively prove the stand taken by them. The Assessing Officer has resorted to the estimation of income from the guest house as the as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed CIT (A). Therefore, we are of the considered view that the findings recorded by the learned CIT (A) are judicious and are well reasoned. Accordingly, we uphold the same. Resultantly, this ground raised by the assessee stands dismissed. Ground No.3 8. This ground relates to making an addition us/ 14A of Rs. 1,56,763/-. The Ld. CIT(A) has dealt with this issue in para no.6.3 which is reproduced below: "6.3 Decision :- The Assessing Officer in the assessment order has raised a very interesting issue, i.e. the share of profit from the firm which is exempt u/s 10(2A) of the Income Tax Act has been taken into consideration for invoking provisions u/s 14A. The assessee during the year received salary of Rs. 3,62,000/- and profit of Rs. 9,19,303/- from the firm. The assessee claimed interest of Rs. 2,18,485/- as deduction in the computation. The Assessing Officer has calculated the disallowable expenses on account of interest at Rs. 1,56,763/- relatable to earning of exempt income. During the appellate proceedings the assessee submitted that the share of profit from partnership firm should not be considered for the purposes of see. 14A, as the firm is paying tax on total income ....