1973 (9) TMI 28 - HC - Income Tax

Court allows deduction of expenses from share income, loss set-off, & quantification of losses.

The court ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction of interest and other expenses from share income, quantification and set-off of losses ... Sales Tax, Trading Receipt Issues Involved:1. Deduction of interest and other expenses from share income.2. Quantification and set-off of losses from previous years against share income.3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to direct quantification of losses for earlier years.4. Set-off of losses from assessment years 1955-56 to 1959-60 against share income.5. Relief under section 15C of the Income-tax Act.6. Deduction of loss due to depreciation in stock value against share income.Detailed Analysis:1. Deduction of Interest and Other Expenses from Share Income:The Tribunal left the matter of deduction of interest and other expenses to the Income-tax Officer, who was to determine the actual expenses incurred by the assessee for earning the share income. The court noted that 'any expenditure incurred by a partner in earning the share income is an allowable deduction in the hands of the partner as against his share income' (citing Commissioner of Income-tax v. Ramniklal Kothari and Commissioner of Income-tax v. A. M. Kaithan). Therefore, the Income-tax Officer must scrutinize whether the expenses were incurred in connection with earning the share income. The question was technically answered in favor of the assessee but subject to the Income-tax Officer's scrutiny.2. Quantification and Set-off of Losses from Previous Years Against Share Income:The Tribunal directed the Income-tax Officer to quantify the losses for the assessment years 1952-53 to 1954-55 and allow the set-off against the share income for 1960-61 and 1961-62. The court upheld this direction, stating that the Tribunal must determine the taxable income for the years in question, which includes considering the carry forward and set-off of losses from previous years. The court referenced Commissioner of Income-tax v. Khushal Chand Daga, which supports the principle that losses can be redetermined in a subsequent year if not duly quantified earlier. The non-consideration of returns and non-determination of losses by the Income-tax Officer for the years 1952-53 to 1954-55 should not prevent the assessee from getting relief under section 24(1) or section 24(2) for the assessment years 1960-61 and 1961-62.3. Jurisdiction of the Tribunal to Direct Quantification of Losses for Earlier Years:The court found that the Tribunal had jurisdiction to direct the Income-tax Officer to quantify the losses for the assessment years 1952-53 to 1954-55. It was necessary for determining the taxable income for the years 1960-61 and 1961-62. The court distinguished this case from the general observations in Supreme Court cases like Income-tax Officer v. Murlidhar Bhagwan Das and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Manick Sons, which limit the Tribunal's powers to the subject matter of the appeal. The court emphasized that the Tribunal's direction was within its jurisdiction as it related to determining the taxable income for the years under appeal.4. Set-off of Losses from Assessment Years 1955-56 to 1959-60 Against Share Income:The Tribunal held that the assessee's business continued through the partnership and that the losses incurred in the earlier years were related to the same business from which the share income was derived. The court agreed with this finding, rejecting the revenue's argument that the business had changed due to a different calcination process and the temporary leasing of mining lands. The court noted that the assessee continued to own the mining lands and maintained stocks of magnesite ore, which indicated continuity of the business. Thus, the losses from 1955-56 to 1959-60 could be set off against the share income for 1960-61 and 1961-62.5. Relief Under Section 15C of the Income-tax Act:The revenue did not press for a decision on this question, and the court refrained from answering it.6. Deduction of Loss Due to Depreciation in Stock Value Against Share Income:In light of the answers to questions 2 and 4, the court also answered this question against the revenue. The Tribunal had upheld the assessee's claim for deduction of Rs. 41,676, which was the loss due to depreciation in the value of stock-in-trade of magnesite ore, as it was directly related to the business from which the share income was received.Conclusion:The court answered the questions primarily in favor of the assessee, allowing the deduction of interest and other expenses, quantification and set-off of earlier years' losses, and deduction of loss due to depreciation in stock value against the share income. The Tribunal's jurisdiction to direct quantification of losses for earlier years was also upheld.