bgp IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.427 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Shrimati Rajkumari Talreja ..Respondent WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.431 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant Vs. Rajkumari S.Talreja ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.S.C.Tiwari for respondent. CORAM :- V.C.DAGA & J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. DATE : 28TH JULY, 2009 P.C. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant. 2. Revenue is directed to carry out amendment forthwith incorporating the modified substantial questions of law. 3. Learned Counsel for the appellant sought to raise following two substantial questions of law styled as modified questions of law: a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was correct in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) that the assessee is to be treated as deemed owner u/s.27(iiib) of the Income Tax Act? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ITAT was correct in law in confirming the order of the CIT(A) that interest on loans was allowable deduction u/s.24(1)(vi) of the Income Tax Act ? 4. So far as first question is concerned, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the Assessee is a deemed owner of the property by applying the provisions of Section 27(iiiB) of the Act and so far as second questions is concerned, the Tribunal has remanded back the matter to the Assessing Officer for hearing afresh and holding that the case is squarely covered by the provisions of Section 24(1)(vi) of the Act. The view taken by the Tribunal cannot be faulted. The appeals are, therefore, rejected involving no substantial question of law. No order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)