COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS K.K. DHANDA (HUF)
1991 P T D 78
[Punjab and Haryana High Court (India)]
Before Gokal Chand Mital and S.S. Sodhi, JJ
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
versus
K.K. DHANDA (HUF)
Income-tax Reference No. 93 of 1980, decided on 23/02/1989.
Income-tax---
---House property---Self-occupied house property---Determination of annual value---Set off of loss relating to assessment year against income from other sources is allowable.
A reading of the provisions of the Explanation to subsection (2) of section 23 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961, leaves no manner of doubt that the applicability of the second proviso to section 23(1) of the Act clearly stands excluded by the expression "nothing contained in that proviso shall apply in computing the annual value of that residential unit". By the Explanation, the applicability of the second proviso to section 23(1) is excluded not only for the limited purpose of computing the annual value of that residential unit but also for other purposes.
Held, accordingly, that the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in allowing the set off of loss relating to house property claimed in the assessment year 1974-75 against income from other sources.
Ashok Bhan and Ajay Mittal for the Commissioner.
Bhagirath Dass and Ramesh Kumar for the Assessee.
JUDGMENT
S.S. SODHI, J.--The point at issue here pertains to the setting off of the loss relating to house property against income from other sources. The question of law referred for the opinion of this Court, in this behalf, being:
"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing the set off of loss of Rs. 11,839 relating to house property claimed in the assessment year 1974 75?"
The question posed has been raised in the context of a self-occupied house and, therefore, the answer to it depends upon the interpretation of the provisions of subsection (2) of section 23 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). A reading of the provisions of the Explanation to this subsection leaves no manner of doubt that the applicability of the provisions of the second proviso to section 23(1) of the Act clearly stands excluded by the expression "nothing contained in that proviso shall apply in computing the annual value of that residential unit". There is clearly no warrant for accepting the contention of counsel for the Revenue that by this Explanation to subsection (2) of section 23, the applicability of the second proviso to section 23(1) is excluded only for the limited purpose of computing the annual value of residential unit but not for other purposes. On a plain reading of the relevant statutory provisions, therefore the question referred has clearly to be answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
This reference is disposed of accordingly. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
Z.S./784/TQuestion answered in affirmative.