Law:

Section:

Section 23(3)(a) of the income-tax act, 1961-Income from house property-Annual value-Assesses owned residential house but did not occupy it-For his personal convenience assesses resided in another house two miles away-Tribunal found that assessee had not left his house vacant on account of compulsion of business-Whether assessee entitled to exemption under section 23(3)(a )-Held, on facts, no Facts The assessee did not occupy his own residential house but resided with his father in the same town in a house two miles away. The assessee was a bachelor and, therefore, for his own convenience resided with his father. The Tribunal disallowed relief under section 23(3)(a) in view of its finding that the assessee had not left his house vacant on account of business compulsion but on account of personal convenience. On reference : Held Some nexus between the fact of residing in a building not belonging to the assessee and his employment, business or profession must be shown before the benefit under section 23(3)(a ) can be claimed in respect of the residential house which is not occupied by the assessee. On the findings reached by the Tribunal, this nexus or connection had not been established. Accordingly, the assessee was not entitled to the exemption under section 23(3)(a). Judgment G.P. Singh, CJ.-The question of law referred in this reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is as follows: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there is justification in law to hold that the applicant is not entitled to exemption under section 23(3)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?" The reference relates to assessment years 1969-70 to 1972-73. The facts found by the Tribunal are that the assessee lives with his father in the same town where the house in respect of which…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492