HON BLE SRI JUSTICE DILIP B. BHOSALE AND HON BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO ITTA No. 303 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice A. Ramalingeswara Rao) This appeal is directed against order dated 30-01-2003 passed in I.T (S.S) A.No.220/Hyd/1997 for block period 1986-87 to 1996-97 on file of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench (for short, Tribunal ). assessee, Sri Sawarmal Agarwal, is appellant before this Court. Though appellate order of Tribunal had dealt with several questions/issues raised by assessee, only question that falls for our consideration in present appeal is with regard to depreciation and payment of interest on car purchase. Thus, substantial question of law framed for consideration in memorandum of appeal reads as follows: Whether on facts and in circumstances of case Hon ble Tribunal is right in disallowing appellants claim for depreciation and payment of interest on car purchased by him from out of business funds. appellant assessee belongs to group of Sri R. Satyaprakash Agarwal & Sons. He is proprietor of M/s. Sitaram & Sons and has various other business concerns. entire group was involved in textile business. There were search and seizure operations in premises of assessee on 09-01-1996. During course of assessment proceedings, notice under Section 158 BC of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, Act ) was issued on 21-08-1996. assessee appeared along with his representative and furnished necessary details. After obtaining approval of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for getting books of accounts audited under Section 142(2A) of Act, order was passed on 23-12-1996. order was served on assessee and also auditors nominated by Commissioner of Income Tax on 26-12-1996. After receiving special audit report, show cause notice dated 03-07-1997 containing proposed additions was served on assessee on 04-07-1997. On same day i.e., on 04-07-1997, asseesee filed return of income for block search period returning total undisclosed income of Rs.11,75,119/-. assessee also furnished reply to show cause notice on 14-07-1997. Ultimately, assessment was completed and investments in purchase of car along with other items were shown as additions. total unaccounted income was shown as Rs.41,15,038/-. Challenging same, assessee preferred appeal before Tribunal and Tribunal through impugned order, accepted contention of asseesee with regard to investment made in acquisition of car and accordingly allowed set off of income against investment in car. But so far as allowance of depreciation and interest is concerned, it did not accept contention of assessee on ground that learned counsel for assessee was not able to provide evidence to show that car was used for business purpose of assessee. Against said order of Tribunal to extent of disallowance of depreciation and interest on car, present appeal is filed. Before Tribunal, assessee did not produce any evidence to show that car was used for business purpose and in absence of any evidence, Tribunal did not accept plea of assessee. In present appeal, appellant could not demonstrate on basis of record that car was used for business purpose and, therefore, we cannot disturb said finding of fact recorded by Tribunal. Accordingly, we conclude and answer substantial question of law in favour of Revenue and against assessee. appeal is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, also stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. DILIP B. BHOSALE, J A. RAMALINGESWARA RAO, J 24-02-2015 ks Sawamal Agarwal v. Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, In