TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1053X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing respondent company from any allowance on such loss in one year and that whether the loss claimed was revenue or capital loss. CIT Amritsar referred to Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. case (1997 (4) TMI 5 - SUPREME Court ) in support of his opinion as regards deferred loss. Respondent companies submitted a detailed reply to the notice issued, controverting all factual aspects of the case reflected in the notice emphasizing that Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. case (supra) was distinguishable on facts and not applicable to the controversy raised in notice. CIT Amritsar surprisingly in its order dated 21st March 2000, did not deal with detailed reply supported by reasons, submitted by respondent companies. Least that was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed to deal with the Appeals on hand. 2. Respondents in both the Income Tax Appeals on hand are Private Limited Companies engaged in business of purchase and sale of shares, debentures and other securities. 3. Green Field Commercial Private Limited (respondent in ITA No. 02/2002) filed Return on 28th November 1995, disclosing loss of ₹ 1,12,86,432.00. The Return was processed under Section 143(1)(a), Income Tax Act, 1961. On 26th June 1996 the Assessing Officer in exercise of powers under Section 143(2)/143(1) addressed a questionnaire to respondent. Assessing Officer on 12th March, 1998, after receiving response to questionnaire and on examination of accounts accepted total loss as declared provided under Section 143(1)(a) at &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respondents herein, questioned CIT Amritsar's order dated 21st March 2000 in two separate appeals, being ITA No. 264(ASR)2000 and ITA No. 277(ASR)2000. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench (for short Tribunal ), opining that identical issues were involved in two appeals, heard appeals together and allowed both Appeals vide its order dated 24th October 2001. Tribunal quashed order dated 21st March 2000 rendered by CIT Amritsar, whereby assessment orders were set-aside and Assessing Officer asked to examine the matter afresh. 8. The Tribunal order dated 24th October 2001 is question in Income Tax Appeals on hand on the ground set out in the memoranda of appeals. 9. Learned Tribunal has taken a view that CIT Amritsar w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arie to respondents companies. The Companies appeared before Assessing Officer through their representatives and participated in the proceedings, stretching over a period of few years. Respondent companies did not only answer questionnaire but as evident from Assessment Order, produced books of account and other record before Assessing Officer, to reinforce their stand. It was not, therefore, right to conclude that Assessing officer did not give many hearing and thumb nail order was passed or that record of assessee was not examined at the time of assessment. The Tribunal, in the circumstances, was right in concluding that reasons details in CIT Amritsar's order dated 21st July 2000 would not justify the conclusions drawn. 12. Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s erroneous , lacked jurisdiction to exercise such power. This by itself was sufficient for Tribunal to interfere and set-aside the order of CIT Amritsar assailed before it. 13. CIT Amritsar in its notice dated 24th January 2000 sought response from respondent companies on the issues highlighted in the notice namely that loss claimed to have suffered on account of purchase and sale of non-convertible debentures was in fact deferred expenditure disentitling respondent company from any allowance on such loss in one year and that whether the loss claimed was revenue or capital loss. CIT Amritsar referred to Madras Industrial Investment Corpn. Ltd. case (supra) in support of his opinion as regards deferred loss. Respondent companies submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be allowed on pro rata application of period of debentures. In the case before CIT Amritsar, loss had occurred on account of sale of non-convertible debentures. 15. Tribunal, while dealing with the Appeals against CIT Amritsar orders has made a detailed and comprehensive discussion on all aspects of the matter and reinforced conclusions drawn with the details reference to the case law on the subject. The reasons detailed by Tribunal while allowing Appeals cannot be faulted on any of the grounds urged in the Appeals. 16. For the reasons discussed we answer all the substantial questions of law against appellant and in favour of respondents. We accordingly hold that: (i) Tribunal (ITAT Amritsar) was right in holding that there we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
