TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (8) TMI 1957
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the order(s) of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-52, Mumbai for the AYs.2012-13 & 2014-15. Since common issues are involved in all these appeals, these appeals are heard together and decided by this common order. For the sake of convenience, ITA No. 5631/Mum/2017 (AY.2012-13) is taken up first. 2. The only issue raised by assessee in this appeal is against the order of CIT(A), upholding the order of Assessing Officer (AO), thus confirming the addition of Rs.2,28,73,670/- under the head 'income from house property' by estimating the deemed rent at Rs. 3,26,76,672/- on unsold property held as 'stock in trade'. 2.1. The facts in brief are that, the assessee is engaged in the business of construction. During the course of assessm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case of RNA Corp Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT in ITA No.4419/Mum/2017, dt.05-11-2018 and M/s. Saranga Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT in ITA No.4420/Mum/2017, dt.13-03-2019, wherein the issue has been decided in favour of assessee by holding that stock in-trade held by the assessee in the business of construction cannot be subjected to estimation of deemed rent and net income can be assessed under the head 'house property'. 2.3. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we observe that the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of its sister concern and other two decisions, referred herein above. We are therefore of the view that no addition can be made by estimating the deemed rent in respect ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tal 2,51,43,410 According to the AO, the said expenses were in the nature of penalty paid to BMC and therefore, not admissible u/s.37(1) of the Act. In the appellate proceedings, Ld.CIT(A) also confirmed the order of AO on this issue. 3.2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the issue is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case in ITA No.1010/Mum/2013 (AY.2009-10), dt.19-05-2017, wherein it was held that the BMC charges paid to the Corporation were held to be admissible expenses. 3.3. Ld. DR, however, relied on the orders of the authorities below. 3.4. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we obser....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f construction made by the assessee are not for any contravention of any law as these are permissible deviations under the Act and therefore, respectfully following the said orders, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the AO to allow these expenses. Hence, this Ground raised by assessee is allowed. 4. the Ground No.2 raised by assessee in this appeal is against confirmation of disallowance of expenses of Rs.20,97,514/- by the CIT(A) as made by the AO u/s.14A of the Act. 4.1. The facts in brief are that the AO during the assessment proceedings observed that assessee has received tax paid dividend of Rs.1,78,30,865/- and also paid interest expenses in P&L A/c and accordingly asked the assessee to justify as to why the disallowan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....allowance restricted by us in ITA No.1050/Mum/2013 and in ITA No.1010/Mum/2013. We have seen that the facts of this appeal are almost similar to ITA No.1050/Mum/2013 and in ITA No.1010/Mum/2013 and the identical issue is raised by assessee. Thus, considering the principle of consistency, we set-aside the order of AO and ld.CIT(A) and estimate a sum of round figure of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakhs) as disallowance u/s.14A and direct the AO accordingly. Hence, this ground of appeal is partly allowed." 4.4. Therefore respectfully following the said decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee's own case, we direct the AO to make disallowance of Rs.2 Lakhs and delete the remaining amount of Rs.18,97,514/-. This Ground raised by assessee i....