TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 244
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onsideration, the assessee enjoyed income from business of Air Transportation of Goods, Hotel Bookings and Aircrafts Handling Charges. The assessee also enjoyed income from house property. The assessee's case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') at a total income of Rs. 1,34,09,780/- after making the following additions/disallowances: (i) Disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) in respect of property at Saket and Gurgaon- Rs. 26,05,634/-. (ii) Disallowances of security charges- Rs. 4,79,431/- (iii) Addition on account of house property- Rs. 2,69,500/- (iv) Disallowances of Vehicle Expenses- Rs. 1,22,742/- (v) Notional rental....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l security charges claimed at Rs. 5,56,466/-. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and under the law in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,80,000/- under the head 'income from house property' in respect of property situated on 1st Floor, DLF Grand Mall, Gurgaon by estimating notional rental income @Rs. 2,00,000/- per month. 4. That without prejudice to above grounds, the disallowances/addition as confirmed are very excessive. 5. That without prejudice to Ground No. 1 & 3 above, the disallowance/addition, if any maintained by the Hon'ble ITAT, deserve to be telescoped with each other. 6. That the Appellant reserves his right to add, amend/modify the grounds of appeal." 3.0 The Ld. Authorized Representative (AR) submitted that in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h respect to the balance disallowance in respect of security charges, it was submitted that the security charges were paid for different premises utilized by the assessee for business purposes only. On a query from the Bench, the Ld. Authorized Representative agreed that the issue can be re-examined by the Assessing Officer and the assessee shall substantiate before the Assessing Officer that the security charges were incurred for premises which were being used for business purposes. 3.2 With respect to Ground No.3, it was submitted that this ground challenges the action of the Ld. CIT (A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,80,000/- under the head income from the house property by estimating notional rental income at Rs. 2 lacs per month....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acancy allowance is available only if the property is let out and since there is no proof of the said property having ever been let out, the provisions of Sec. 23(1) (a) of the Act would be attracted and the assessee will be liable to pay tax on the notional rent. 4.2 The Ld. Sr. DR also opposed the assessee's plea raised in Ground No.4 for telescoping the various disallowances and submitted that each disallowance has been made on the peculiar facts and circumstances pertaining to such disallowance and, therefore, the benefit of telescoping should not be extended in this case. 5.0 We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material on record. As far as ground No.1 of the assessee's appeal is concerned, it is seen that t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ifferent premises utilized by assessee for business purposes. Accordingly, this issue is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to re-examine this issue afresh after giving proper opportunity to the assessee to present his case. 5.2 In respect of Ground No.3, it is the assessee's contention that he has consistently being submitting before the Lower Authorities that the property at Grand Mall, Gurgaon was lying vacant during the entire Assessment Year and, therefore, no notional rent can be brought to tax on such vacant premises. A perusal of the assessment order shows that this plea of the assessee has not been considered while making the addition on account of notional rent. We also note that the Ld. CIT (A) has ....