Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-12, Kolkata v. Sri Raghu Nandan Modi

OD-26 ITAT/118/2018IA NO: GA/2/2018(Old No.GA/884/2018)IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASPECIAL JURISDICTION (INCOME TAX)ORIGINAL SIDE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, KOLKATAVERSUSSRI RAGHU NANDAN MODI BEFORE : THE HON’BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAMAndTHE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYADate : 30[th] November, 2021 Appearance :- Mr. Suniti Chatterjee, Adv.… For AppellantMr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv.Mr. Asim Chowdhury, Adv.… For Respondent The Court : This appeal by the assessee filed under Section260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act, for brevity) is directedagainst the order dated 2[nd] June, 2017 passed by the Income TaxAppellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkata in ITA No.2186-87/Kol/2014for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The appellant has raisedthe following questions of law for consideration :- “Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case,the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Kolkatawas justified in law or in holding that perquisites of rent free accommodation can be determined only in pursuance ofprovisions of Section 23(1)(a) of the Act which requires todetermine the same as per the guidelines of MunicipalCorporation and not what the property might reasonably beexpected to let out from year to year ?” We have heard Mr. Suniti Chattrjee, learned Standing Counselappearing for the appellant revenue and Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learnedSenior Counsel appearing for the respondent assessee. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant revenue that thepresent appeal cannot be pursued by the revenue on account of lowtax effect. Accordingly, in view of the said submission, the appealstands disposed of on the ground of low tax effect. However,substantial questions of law are left open. The appeal and the connected application are, accordingly,disposed of. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)