- (1.) We have heard, Sri Manu Ghildyal, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Rupesh Jain along with Sri R.S. Agrawal, learned counsel for the assessee.
(2.) The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that claim of depreciation on assets in respect of Radico Textile Unit which had not yet commenced during the year under consideration? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the receipt of interest on loans land deposits given to various parties was income from "Income profits and gains of business and profession" instead of income from other sources? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the depreciation on tube well at a higher rate of 25%? 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding the claim in respect of rent in "Transit Guest House"? 5. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in treating various capital expenses as revenue expenses? 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing deduction for loss on goods in transit being additional ground taken by the assessee in appellate proceedings whereas the claim for deduction is in respect of the preceding year which is still pending in appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Bareilly -
(3.) Issue No. 2 is covered against the assessee in assessee's own case for the Assessment Year 1990 -1991 reported in : 274 ITR 354. Consequently, the issue is decided against the assessee and in favour of the Department.;