2003 (1) TMI 260 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal upholds disallowance of business loss and office expenses under IT Act

The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of the business loss as speculative under section 73 of the IT Act, stating that share broking and share dealing are ... Losses, Speculation Business Issues Involved:1. Treatment of business loss on delivery-based purchase and sale transactions of shares as speculative.2. Disallowance of office expenses.3. Levy of interest.Summary:Issue 1: Treatment of Business Loss as SpeculativeThe appellant, a company engaged in the sale and purchase of shares, claimed a business loss of Rs. 37,40,568. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed the set-off of this loss, treating it as speculative u/s 73 of the IT Act. The appellant argued that the loss was due to clients not honoring their commitments, forcing the company to take delivery of shares. However, the Tribunal noted that the appellant admitted to purchasing shares on its own account, not on behalf of clients. The Tribunal upheld the AO's decision, stating that the business of share broking and share dealing are distinct, and the loss from speculative business cannot be set off against non-speculative income. The Tribunal also rejected the appellant's claim that the business was composite and thus should be treated as one.Issue 2: Disallowance of Office ExpensesThe AO disallowed Rs. 49,818 out of the office expenses claimed by the appellant, treating them as entertainment expenses. The CIT(A) reduced this disallowance to 30% of the total expenses. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, referencing the Delhi High Court's judgment in CIT v. Expo Machinery Ltd. [1991] 190 ITR 576.Issue 3: Levy of InterestThe appellant contested the levy of interest u/s 234A, 234B, and 234C, arguing that the AO did not specifically direct the levy of interest in the assessment order. The Tribunal rejected this ground, noting that the issue was not raised before the CIT(A) and no application for additional grounds was made before the Tribunal.ConclusionThe appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal upholding the disallowance of the business loss as speculative and the partial disallowance of office expenses, while dismissing the ground related to the levy of interest.