TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (6) TMI 1024
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessment year 2009-10, on the following grounds:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the order whereby he had disallowed the claim of deduction of maintenance charges paid to society / builder in respect of the following flats let out by the appellant. (i) Flat no.2702, Octavius, Powai, Mumbai Rs. 24,240 (ii) Flat no.503 Delphi Premises, Powai Rs. 1,01,088 2. The said CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the leave and licence agreement with the tenant there is a specific mention that the maintenance charges of the flats payable to society / builder will have to be paid by the appellant out of the actual rent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent while calculating the annual letting value. 3. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's contention and held that other than the amounts covered by clause (a) and (b) of section 24, no other deduction can be claimed by the assessee against the rental income of the property. Thus, the society maintenance charges cannot be allowed as deduction while computing the income under the head "income from house property". He submitted that the judicial pronouncements relied upon by the assessee relate to the assessment years prior to assessment year 2002-03 and, hence, cannot be said to be applicable to the current provisions of section 23 and 24. Thus, he disallowed the claim of maintenance charges claimed by the assessee. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ner v/s ITO, ITA no.2381 and 2382/Mum./2010, which was for the assessment year 2005-06 and 2006-07. In these decisions, the Tribunal has considered other decisions, wherein it has been held that maintenance charges to the society are to be allowed while conducting the annual value determined under section 23(1). 6. The learned Departmental Representative, on the other hand, strongly relied upon the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and submitted that once the statutory deduction of 30% is allowed, then the same excludes all kind of maintenance and charges. 7. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the relevant findings of the authorities below and the material available on record. The Assessing Officer as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(1) For the purposes of section 22, the annual value of any property shall be deemed to be- (a) the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year; or (b) where the property or any part of the property is let and the actual rent received or receivable by the owner in respect thereof is in excess of the sum referred to in clause (a), the amount so received or receivable; or (c) where the property or any part of the property is let and was vacant during the whole or any part of the previous year and owing to such vacancy the actual rent received or receivable by the owner in respect thereof is less than the sum referred to in clause (a), the amount so received o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion under section 24, is to be calculated on the basis of income which is earned and chargeable to tax under section 22 and 23. If the gross rent also includes society charges, which is to be paid by the assessee, then while computing the annual value, the amount of rent which is actually received in the hands of the owner in respect of the lease property should be taken into consideration while giving the deduction under section 24. Thus, the actual rent received as envisaged in section 23, should be construed as net rental income received after deducting mandatory society charges. This view has been upheld by the Tribunal, Mumbai Benches, in Saif Ali Khan (supra), wherein the following decisions have been relied upon:- i)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....relied on by the ld. counsel for the assessee. The decisions relied on by the ld. CIT(A), in our opinion, are distinguishable and not applicable to the facts of the present case. 8. We find the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gopichand P. Godhwani (supra), after considering the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of J.K. Investors (Bombay) Ltd. (2001) 168 CTR (Bom) 189 has held that for the purpose of determining annual value of the property all taxes, cesses and outgoings being liabilities of the assessee, have to be excluded from assessable income in view of s. 23(1)(b). So far as the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Barodawala Properties Ltd. (supra) is concerned, we find that the Tribunal in subse....