https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292419 An appeal by the Income Tax Officer under Section 33(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was maintainable because the challenge raised a question of law going to the validity of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order, and prior acceptance of the deduction in principle did not bar the appeal. The assessee firm could not deduct the claimed amount as a trading loss because it was a separate entity from the original lender, the relevant half-share in the mortgage had no real value at the start of the accounting year, and no loss was actually incurred by the assessee during that year. The reference was answered against the assessee on both issues. en-us Fri, 23 Feb 1945 00:00:00 +0630 Wed, 23 Dec 2020 10:23:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292419 An appeal by the Income Tax Officer under Section 33(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was maintainable because the challenge raised a question of law going to the validity of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner's order, and prior acceptance of the deduction in principle did not bar the appeal. The assessee firm could not deduct the claimed amount as a trading loss because it was a separate entity from the original lender, the relevant half-share in the mortgage had no real value at the start of the accounting year, and no loss was actually incurred by the assessee during that year. The reference was answered against the assessee on both issues. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 23 Feb 1945 00:00:00 +0630 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292419