2003 (2) TMI 171 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal confirms speculation losses, directs review of set-off eligibility

Melville Finvest Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner Of Income-tax.

Melville Finvest Ltd. Versus Joint Commissioner Of Income-tax. - ITD 089, 528, TTJ 091, 488, Issues involved:1. Classification of the assessee-company as an investment company.2. Applicability of Explanation to Section 73 of the Income Tax Act.3. Treatment of losses from share transactions as speculation losses.4. Consideration of the decrease in the value of shares as part of speculation loss.5. Classification of the purchase and sale of yarn as speculative activity.6. Eligibility for set-off of carried forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation.Detailed Analysis:1. Classification of the assessee-company as an investment company:The assessee-company argued that it should be classified as an investment company based on its Memorandum of Association and its investments in shares shown in the Balance Sheet. However, the CIT(A) and the Tribunal found that this classification was not relevant for the application of Explanation to Section 73. The Tribunal emphasized that the composition of the gross total income, rather than the nature of investments, was the determining factor.2. Applicability of Explanation to Section 73 of the Income Tax Act:The Explanation to Section 73 was invoked by the Assessing Officer and upheld by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the assessee's gross total income did not consist mainly of specified categories of income such as interest on securities, income from house property, capital gains, and income from other sources. The Tribunal cited the decisions of the Calcutta High Court in Aryasthan Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT and Eastern Aviation & Industries Ltd. v. CIT to support the application of the Explanation, concluding that the loss from share transactions should be treated as speculation loss.3. Treatment of losses from share transactions as speculation losses:The Assessing Officer and the CIT(A) treated the loss from share transactions as speculation loss, which could not be set off against other incomes. The Tribunal upheld this view, noting that the substantial loss from share transactions indicated that the gross total income did not consist mainly of the specified categories of income. The Tribunal also referred to the decision in Prudential Construction Co. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT, which supported the inclusion of the decrease in the value of shares as part of speculation loss.4. Consideration of the decrease in the value of shares as part of speculation loss:The Tribunal agreed with the CIT(A) that the decrease in the value of shares should be considered as part of the speculation loss. The Tribunal cited the decision in Prudential Construction Co. Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT, which held that the value of opening and closing stock forms an integral part of the computation of profit or loss from share trading. The Tribunal rejected the assessee's argument that the decrease in the value of shares was a notional figure and should not be considered as part of the speculation loss.5. Classification of the purchase and sale of yarn as speculative activity:The Tribunal did not entertain the assessee's plea to classify the purchase and sale of yarn as speculative activity. The Tribunal noted that this plea was raised for the first time before the Tribunal and required investigation into fresh facts. The Tribunal emphasized that such a plea could not be entertained for the first time at the appellate stage, especially when it was not raised before the Assessing Officer or in response to the show-cause notice issued by the CIT(A).6. Eligibility for set-off of carried forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation:The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to examine the issue of set-off for carried forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation of earlier years against the income of the year under appeal. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had not taken a ground on this issue before the Tribunal, nor was it argued during the hearing. However, the Tribunal deemed it fair to direct the Assessing Officer to consider this issue, given the finding that the transactions of purchase and sale of shares constituted speculation activity.Conclusion:The Tribunal upheld the order of the CIT(A), rejecting the contentions of the assessee and confirming the treatment of losses from share transactions as speculation losses. The Tribunal also directed the Assessing Officer to examine the eligibility for set-off of carried forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation. The assessee's appeal was dismissed.