9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t year 1993-94, the assessee applied for 1,41,000 non-convertible debentures of Rs. 400 each issued by Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd. The application money was Rs. 12 each. The assessee in applying for 1,41,000 non-convertible debentures paid an application money of Rs. 16,92,000. However, only 82,863 non-convertible debentures were, in fact, issued to the assessee. Needless to mention, the excess amount paid by the assessee by way of application money was refunded to him. Therefore, the effective investment of the assessee in applying for 82,863 partly paid non-convertible debentures was Rs. 9,94,356. The aforesaid debentures were accompanied with detachable warrants which entitled the assessee to buy an equal number of shares at a rate to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee that he had suffered short-term capital loss of a sum of Rs. 9,94,356 was disallowed. The assessee had retained the detachable warrants worth (69863 A12) Rs. 8,38,356 and recovered a sum of Rs. 7,15,000 by selling 13,000 detachable warrants. Thus, the total receipt was (8,38,356 + 7,15,000) Rs. 15,53,356. After deducting the application money (15,53,356 9,94,356), a sum of Rs. 5,59,000 was earned which was treated as his business income. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). He upheld the contentions of the assessee. The Revenue preferred an appeal before the learned Tribunal which reversed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax ( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... purpose of obtaining the detachable warrants without intending to make any investment. The situation might have been different in case the assessee had invested the full amount of the non-convertible debentures for the purpose of earning interest at 18.5 per cent. per annum and would thereafter have been entitled to the detachable warrants free of cost. In that case, the assessee could have claimed the benefit of the ratio in the case of Sri Krishna Dairy (supra). Since the facts of both the cases are altogether dissimilar, the views expressed by the Andhra Pradesh High Court can have no manner of application to the facts and circumstances of this case. Mr. Murarka also drew our attention to an identical view in an identical fact taken by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isition of detachable warrants and that, therefore, such pre-determined loss was in the nature of and/or must be predicated as cost of acquisition of such detachable warrants was justified and not perverse ?" It would appear that the first question, the third and the fourth questions framed at the time of admission, are on the question as to whether the findings of the learned Tribunal are perverse. We have enquired of Mr. Murarka to show that as to how are the findings perverse, to which his reply was that the relevant evidence was ignored. We requested Mr. Murarka to find out from the memorandum of appeal any ground alleging that any particular piece of evidence was ignored by the Tribunal. He replied that there is no such ground taken i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
