TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Business rent payments and share-trading loss claims upheld as genuine, rejecting conjecture and sustaining tax deductions.</h1> Deductibility of alleged rent was upheld because rent payment was undisputed and, on concurrent findings of the CIT(A) and Tribunal, the premises were ... Allowance of deduction of business expenditure as and by way of payment of alleged rent - share loss in the purchase and sale of shares - HELD THAT:- No opportunity was given to cross-examine him and even the caretaker may not be aware of the full details regarding the occupation of the premises. Payment of rent by the assessee has not been denied. Whether any business is being carried on by the assessee-company or it was taken for the purpose of residence of one of its employees or directors, that is immaterial. In both the cases the premises has been taken on rent, that is, for the purpose of business. The Tribunal finally concurred with the facts found by the Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, whether the premises was taken on rent for the purpose of business or not, the concurrent finding is that it was taken for the purpose of business. Therefore, the questions being raised on the findings of fact, such findings cannot be said to be perverse on the materials discussed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Tribunal. When the share transaction was made through a registered broker of the stock exchange, the quotations of shares were found correct as per the record of the stock exchange. Whether the assessee sold 7000 or 70000 shares does not make any difference. It is the assessee's concern how to run the business. The claim to loss should not be disallowed on conjectures and surmises, such as, that there is a practice in Calcutta to claim bogus loss in share dealings. The Tribunal being the final fact-finding body has found the fact on the basis of the materials on record that the assessee has suffered the loss in share-dealings. These findings cannot be said to be perverse on the basis of the materials considered and discussed in order of the Tribunal. In the result, so far as the question relates to whether the finding of the Tribunal is based on materials on record we answer it in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. So far as the question raised was as to whether the finding is perverse, we answer it in the negative, that is, in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Issues:1. Allowance of deduction of business expenditure for alleged rent.2. Allowance of share loss in the purchase and sale of shares.Issue 1 - Allowance of Deduction of Business Expenditure for Alleged Rent:The assessee, an investment company, claimed a deduction of Rs. 36,000 as rent for premises at Flat No. 84, Middleton Street, Calcutta. The Income Tax Officer initially disallowed the rent deduction based on an adverse report from an Inspector regarding the usage of the premises. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed the claim, noting common practices in Calcutta where rent can be adjusted against advances to landlords. The Tribunal upheld this decision, emphasizing that the premises were used for business purposes, regardless of whether it was for an employee or director. The Tribunal found the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) to be based on relevant evidence, thus not perverse.Issue 2 - Allowance of Share Loss in Purchase and Sale of Shares:The assessee claimed a loss of Rs. 49,210 in share dealings, which was initially disallowed by the Income Tax Officer and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals) citing inadequate records and suspicions of bogus claims. However, the Tribunal disagreed with these findings, noting that the transactions were conducted through registered brokers and the share rates were verified. The Tribunal emphasized that the claim of loss should not be dismissed based on conjectures, and found in favor of the assessee, concluding that the loss in share dealings was genuine. The Tribunal's decision was based on the materials on record and not considered perverse. In conclusion, the High Court of Calcutta ruled in favor of the assessee on both issues, affirming the Tribunal's decisions regarding the allowance of deduction for alleged rent and the share loss in purchase and sale of shares.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
