TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
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>Appeal granted: Set-off business loss against capital gain allowed under Income Tax Act Section 50.</h1> <h3>Sky Lite Electro Fixtures P. Ltd. Versus ITO Ward- 7 (2) (3), Mumbai</h3> Sky Lite Electro Fixtures P. Ltd. Versus ITO Ward- 7 (2) (3), Mumbai - TMI Issues:1. Delay in filing the appeal due to non-service of impugned order.2. Whether carried forward business loss can be set off against capital gain computed under Section 50 of the Income Tax Act.Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal due to non-service of impugned orderThe appeal by the assessee was directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for Assessment Year 2007-08. The appeal was found to be barred by 375 days of limitation period due to non-service of the impugned order. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay, explaining that the order was not served at the given address, as the registered office was closed, and the affairs were being managed by another individual. The delay was also attributed to financial constraints preventing the timely filing of the appeal. The Tribunal, after considering the contentions and verifying the non-service of the order, decided to condone the delay and proceed with hearing the appeal on merit.Issue 2: Set off of carried forward business loss against capital gain under Section 50The assessee had filed the return of income for the relevant assessment year, claiming set off of carried forward business loss against the total income. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed the set off of the business loss against the capital gain computed under Section 50 of the Act. On appeal, the action of the AO was confirmed. The main issue revolved around whether the carried forward business loss could be set off against the capital gain. The assessee argued that the set off was permissible and relied on precedents from various Tribunals. The Tribunal analyzed the legal provisions and cited decisions from Mumbai and Pune Tribunals to support the contention that the assessee was entitled to set off the carried forward business loss against the capital gain computed under Section 50 of the Act. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing the AO to permit the set off as claimed by the assessee.In conclusion, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay in filing the appeal due to non-service of the impugned order and allowed the appeal on the issue of setting off carried forward business loss against the capital gain under Section 50 of the Income Tax Act. The decision was based on legal interpretations and precedents supporting the assessee's claim for the set off.
TaxTMI 