1985 (2) TMI 60

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nth. For the rest of the period, the house was occupied by his son who was a student of MIT Manipal, along with a servant. The assessee, therefore, claimed that since he could not actually occupy the property by reason of his employment elsewhere, there should be remission of the annual letting value proportionately to the period not occupied by him. This was denied by the authorities below. In the further appeal before us, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that the provisions of sub-section (3) of section 23 was designed only to meet a contingency such as this where the assessee could not himself occupy the residential premises and, therefore, he was entitled to the relief. On the other hand, it was contended on behalf of the reve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nsists of one residential house only and it cannot actually be occupied by the owner by reason of the fact that owing to his employment, business or profession carried on any other place, he has to reside at that other place in a building not belonging to him, the annual value of that house shall be taken at nil and in case it was partly occupied by him for a fraction of the previous year a proportionate of the annual value shall be taxed. The AAC had referred to the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT v. Rani Kaniz Abid 1972 Tax LR 587 which was a case under sub-section (2) of section 23. In that case it was held that though the assessee did not actually reside in the house but only her daughter and son-in-law resided t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Bhagwan Dass Jain v. Union of India [1981] 128 ITR 315. But where the assessee is not actually in occupation of the house, this benefit would no longer be available and that is, perhaps, the reason why sub-section (3) of section 23 has been enacted to give relief where the assessee is not actually in occupation. The meaning of the phrase 'actually occupied' can be clearly understood by the acceptable reason given in the section itself, viz., 'by reason of the fact that owing to his employment, business or profession carried on at any other place, he has to reside at that other place in a building not belonging to him'. This shows that where the assessee is required to have a double establishment the statute intended to give the assessee....