Deepak Kapoor, New Delhi vs Assessee on 25 January, 2011
5. The assessee is now in appeal before us against the aforesaid finding of the ld.
CIT (A). The ld. AR on behalf of the assessee while carrying us through the impugned
order and inviting our attention to provisions of section 23 of the Act, contended that the
assessee had the right to exercise his option to choose one of the property as self-
occupied property in terms of provisions of section 23(4) of the Act. Since the assessee
during the course of assessment proceedings, exercised the option, treating Greater
Kailash Enclave-I property as self-occupied, the AO could not thrust upon the assessee
Malviya Nagar property as self-occupied. The ld. AR further submitted that in the event
Greater Kailash Enclave-I property is considered as self-occupied, then the annual
letting value of the property at Malviya Nagar would have to be determined in the light of
decisions in the case of CIT Vs. Moni Kumar Subba [2011] 333 ITR 38 (Del.