https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273550 The Tribunal did not exceed its powers by drawing a different legal inference from the same agreement; construing the transaction's legal effect remained within section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. On the merits, an agreement requiring the assessee to share both profits and losses in a film venture showed that the monies were placed in the business as an investment to earn a share of profits, not as a mere financing or money-lending arrangement. The resulting loss was therefore capital in nature and not deductible under section 10(1) or section 10(2)(xi). en-us Mon, 27 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Jul 2018 14:36:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273550 The Tribunal did not exceed its powers by drawing a different legal inference from the same agreement; construing the transaction's legal effect remained within section 33(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. On the merits, an agreement requiring the assessee to share both profits and losses in a film venture showed that the monies were placed in the business as an investment to earn a share of profits, not as a mere financing or money-lending arrangement. The resulting loss was therefore capital in nature and not deductible under section 10(1) or section 10(2)(xi). Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=273550