Case Law Details
Advocate Akhilesh Kumar Sah
Shri Sachin R. Tendulkar Vs DCIT (ITAT Mumbai): The assessee had been unable to let out the property for the captioned period, he was entitled to deduction under section 23(1)(c) for vacancy allowance
In Sachin R. Tendulkar vs. DCIT [I.T.A. No. 3755/Mum/2016 (A.Y.: 2012-13), decided on 10.08.2018], the ground raised was that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-34, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT (A)] erred in arriving at the deemed rental income in respect of the vacant flat situated at Sapphire Park, Balewadi, Pune @ Rs.15,000 per month and computing the Annual Rent Receivable for the said flat at Rs.1,80,000/- and confirming the addition made by the AO on deemed rental income for the said flat at Rs.1,26,000/- as against Rs.8,60,445/- made by him. The Appellant submitted that since the property had not been let out and the Appellant had not derived any benefit there from during the year the AO ought to have granted vacancy allowance under section 23(2) and compute the Annual Value at Nil. The Appellant prayed that the entire addition of Rs.8,60,445/- to be deleted.
The assessee being an individual and well renowned cricketer earning his income from playing cricket, modeling and endorsements had filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 28.09.2012 declaring an income of Rs.61,23,14,400/-. In the assessment order passed under section 143(3), the Assessing Officer(AO) inter alia made an addition of Rs.8,60,445/- under the head income from house property.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
