BHAGYA MAHANTESH KHODANPUR ,HUBBALLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), HUBBALLI
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 1365/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Aug 2025AY 2015-16
Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2015-16 Bhagya Mahantesh Khodanpur, Income Tax Officer, Indu Arcade, Vithoba Galli, Ward-2(1), Durgadbail, Vs. Hubballi. Hubballi-580020. Pan No : Apxpk0150P Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Sri Sudheendra B.R, Advocate Respondent By : Sri Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate-Standing Counsel For Revenue Date Of Hearing : 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.08.2025 O R D E R Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote: This Is An Appeal Filed By Bhagya Mahantesh Khodanpur Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (Nfac) (In Short “Ld. Cit(A)”) Passed U/S. 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”) For Asst Year 2015-16 On 28/03/2025 Emanating From Assessment Order Dated 29/12/2017 Passed U/S. 143(3) Of The Act. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Passed By The Ld. Addl / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Gurugram U/S. 250 Of The Act Dated 28/03/2025 Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Quashed. Addition Of Rs. 4,42,500/- Is Bad In Law & 2. Liable To Be Deleted.
For Appellant: Sri Sudheendra B.R, Advocate
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 24Section 250
house property"
shall be computed after making the following deductions, namely:—
(a)
………
(b) where the property has been acquired, constructed, repaired, renewed or reconstructed with borrowed capital, the amount of any interest payable on such capital:
10. Thus, section 24(b) clearly states that where the property has been acquired or constructed with borrowed capital, the amount of
Page
