Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2013 (7) TMI 732

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n-genuine in nature. The assessee belongs to Ketan Parekh Group of cases and was engaged in share broking and share trading and investment in share trading securities till 2004. The assessee claimed reduction in value of shares to the extent of Rs.58,420/- as loss in P&L Account. There were no sale of shares during the year as the assessee's business was stopped because of suspension of trading in securities of this company on 21.12. 2004 for the reason that the assessee is not having any business activity and the loss resulting on account of difference in valuation of shares was not allowed. 2.1 It was submitted that loss was being allowed to the assessee by the orders of the ITAT in assessee's own case in earlier years as well as in ca....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,875/- paid to R.S. Khandelwal & Associates the assessee had deducted tax and has paid belatedly. Amount of Rs.12,025/- was paid to Advocate Dhruva & Company. The amount was less than Rs.20,000/- therefore, there is no need for deducting tax. Accordingly, it was submitted that the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) are not applicable. However, CIT(A) confirmed the same. 3.1 After considering the rival contentions, we are of the view that the AO and the CIT(A) erred in mixing up the facts. As far as fees of Rs.2,39,875/-, there was TDS which was paid belatedly. Even though AO mentioned the same, he did not disallow the amount of Rs.2,39,875/- . Only disallowance in the order is Rs.12,025/- paid to advocate on which provisions of sec. 194J ar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....planation-2 to sec.73 thereby not setting off against income from other sources. While taking income of Rs.31,223/- as income from other sources, the business loss claimed as reduction in value was not set off considering that as speculation loss. We have already held in Ground No.1 that assessee is entitled to claim business loss and in ground No.3 as income from business. Assessee is entitled set off net business loss if any. Explanation to section 73 does not apply to the facts as there are no purchases and sale of shares during year and loss is of reduction in valuation of closing stock. Ground No.4 is accordingly allowed. 6. Ground No.5 pertains to not allowing expenses claimed by the assessee on the ground that the assessee has not....