2019 (6) TMI 1167

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Atul Karsandas Jasani for the Appellant. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondent No.1.   P.C.:- 1. Appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial questions of law:- "i. Whether the Tribunal erred in holding that the Appellant is not entitled to depreciation of Rs. 93,75,63,113/- on leased assets? ii. Whether the Tribunal ought to have allowed the Appellant's....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the Tribunal ought to have allowed the Appellant's claim for deduction of the amount of Rs. 1302,24,75,974/- as write off of bad debts under section 36(1)(vii) of the Act in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank v. CIT 323 ITR 166? c. Whether the Tribunal ought to have held that the recovery of bad debts earlier written off could not be assessed to t....