In its return for the relevant ass_essment years, the assessee claimed losses of Rs. 1,00,723/Rs. 1,16,599/and Rs. 1,16,599/- respectively but showed the gross a.nnual letting value from the said property_ at Nil. The loss claimed was stated D to be on account of interest payable to the bank. Since the property in question has vested in $e Custodian of Evacuee Property, in Pakistan, the Income-tax Officer held that no income or loss from that property can be considered in the assessee's case. He accordingly disallowed the assessee's claim in respect of the interest paid to the bank. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed the ord~r of the Income-tax Officer. In second appeal E the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the. assessee still continued to be the owner -of the property for the purpose of computation of]oss. The Tribunal held that the interest paid is a deductable allowance under s. 9(1)(iv) of the Act. In arriving at that conclusion, the Tribunal relied on its earlier decision in the case of the asst)ssee. in respect of the assessment year 1951-52. F Thereafter at the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal submitted the question &el out earlier. The High Court on an analysis of the v;µ'ious provisions of the Pakistan (Administration of Evacuee Property) Ordinance, 1949 (XV of 1949) (to be hereinafter referred to as the 'Ordinance') came to the conclusion that for the purpose of s. 9 of the Act, the assessee cannot be considered as G the owner of that property.
