TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 637
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned Assessing Officer's action of disallowing "amounts written off" as business loss during the relevant previous year amounting to Rs. 3,20,34,757/- allegedly on the ground that the same is not allowable under Section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and/or Section 28 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The appellant craves leave to add, alter or amend the ground of appeal at a later stage. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case as emerging from the records are that the assessee company is a joint-venture Company of Bharti Enterprises Holding (Private) Limited and Rohthschild ELRO Holdings, Mauritius and it was engaged in business of dealing and exporting all kinds of agriculture produce such as fruits, vegetable, floriculture produce. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n 37(1) of the Act. Accordingly, he made addition of Rs. 3,20,34,757/- and assessment under section 143(3) of the Act was completed on 31/12/2009. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal. Aggrieved with the finding of Ld. CIT(A) , the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the ground involving the issue of disallowance of business loss of Rs. 3,20,34,757/-. 4. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee referred to an application filed on 14/08/2017 under Rule 29 of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 (in short 'ITAT Rules') for admitting additional evidences, which included a copy of arbitration award in respect of the advances recoverable from M/s Sutlej power Pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ess of exporting of agriculture produce like fruits vegetables etc. The assessee company did not own any agriculture land and thus it planned to buy the agriculture produce from farmers through certain aggregator companies. For this purpose, the assessee entered into agreements with following two companies for procurement of the agriculture produce: 1. M/s Rajtech Agro Plantation Private Limited vide agreement dated 16/01/2006. 2. M/s Sutlej Power P. Ltd. wide agreement dated 21/07/2006. 7. Those aggregate accompanies were given responsibility of aggregating individual farmer's land, supervising agriculture produce, procuring grading and supplying the agriculture produce to the assessee company, under the terms and cond....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....contended that the Assessing Officer has not appreciated various clauses of the agreement. He submitted that the clause (6) of the agreement relied upon by the Assessing Officer also specifies that in the event of agriculture produce being destroyed or not of the acceptable quality or on account of failure of the crops due to factors beyond the control of the grower, the loss had to be borne only by the assessee company. 12. The Ld. CIT(A) rejected the contention of the assessee and upheld the finding of the Ld. Assessing Officer, observing as under: "6.3 Decision I have considered the submission of the appellant and observation of the Assessing Officer. It is seen that during the year appellant has written off of Rs. 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at page 34 of the paper book, which reads as under: "Force majeure Neither Party ("Affected Party") shall be liable to the other Party ("Non- affected Party ") for breach of this Agreement to the extent caused by or arising from prohibition or restriction by law or regulation of any government, fire, flood, storms, weather, strike, lockout or other labour problems, accident, riots, acts of god, breakdown of communication facilities, or events beyond the control of the party in breach. Notwithstanding anything contained hereinabove, the Affected Party shall use its best efforts to resume full performance thereof without avoidable delay, provided that if any delay in the Affected Party 's performance caused by a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pute before us. Moreover, we observe that the arbitration proceeding have been initiated only against one-party namely Sutlej agriculture Private Limited, whereas substantial amount of advance written off as in respect of the Sutlej Power Private Limited (Agri Dv) (Rs.2,04,78,448/-) and Rajtech Agro plantation private limited (Rs.98,47,920/-). We note that no other document or correspondence evidencing the reasons of write-offs and any efforts for making recovery has been shown by the assessee. Even no agreement of settlement of dispute in respect of the amount involved between the assessee and the producers has been filed by the assessee. The Ld. counsel has reiterated that business of agriculture trade is highly fragile and risky and t....