Commissioner of Income Tax, vs. Dr. T.Ravi Kumar,

Bench: : The Hon’Ble Justice Surya Prakash Kesarwani & The Hon’Ble Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj Date : 10Th April, 2024. Appearance: Mr. J. P. Khaitan, Senior Advocate Mr. Sanjay Bhowmick, Advocate Ms. Swapna Das, Advocate … For The Appellant. Ms. Smita Das De, Advocate … For The Respondent. 1. Heard Sri J. P. Khaitan, Learned Senior Advocate Assisted By Sri Sanjay Bhowmick, Learned Counsel For The Appellant/Assessee & Ms. Smita Das De, Learned Senior Standing Counsel For The Respondent. 2. The Assessment Years Involved In The Present Appeal Are Assessment Year 1999-2000 & Assessment Year 2000-01. By Order Dated 16.08.2012, This Appeal Was Admitted On The Following Substantial Questions Of Law :-

Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, 1961. He allowed the depreciation, treated the income from leasing under the head “business or profession” but rejected the claim of interest of Rs.60,50,250/- as deductible expenditure. Thus, the income was assessed as loss of Rs.1,38,92,820/-. The carrying forward of losses was not disputed. 6

Commissioenr of Income Tax vs. Dr. T. Ravi Kumar

6,78,228/- disallowed and confirmed in appeal on account of depreciation on guest house building and assets used in the guest on the basis of Bombay High Court decision reported in 187 ITR 660 and the AO had disallowed on the round the said decision is not pending. It is the plea of the Id. Counsel that

THE COMMI.OF INCOME TAX,HYD. vs. VAIBHAV

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

250-,4. of the Income Act,1967 (briefly 'the Act'hereinafter) arise out of the order dated28.0l.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench 'A', Hyderabad (briefly 'Tribunal' herehafter) in I.T.A No.2a6/H'yd/ 2OO1 for the assessmenr year 1997-98. I I I i I 2 5. Appellant in i.T.T.ANo.58 of 2002 is an assessee under