9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 989X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the entire income of the appellant was assessable under the head "income from other sources" and not under the head "profits and gains of business or professions"? 3. The facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for assessment year 1997-98 declaring loss of Rs. 23,208/- which was processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act. The case having been selected for scrutiny, a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act was issued to the appellant. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment at an income of Rs. 2,10,230/-. The assessee had shown income of Rs. 2,10,285.09 against which expenses of Rs. 2,32,888.14 were claimed. During th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny to carry on business of financing and investment. The CIT(A) has confirmed the decision of the Assessing Officer. 5. Against the order of the CIT (A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. It was pointed out that the company had been incorporated in the year 1984 with the main object of carrying on business of the dealers, traders of chemicals, etc. Since the company could not start the business as per the main objects, a special resolution was passed by the shareholders at the extraordinary meeting held on 28.11.1984 authorising the company to do business of financing and for that purpose advance deposit or lend money from time to time. Thereafter, the company had carried on the financing business and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appeal by confirming the decision of the CIT(A). Hence the assessee has preferred this appeal. 8. Learned senior advocate Mr. Soparkar for the assessee has contended that on identical issue in the case of sister concern in Income Tax Appeal No. 1756 & 1757/Ahd/2000 for assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 the same Tribunal has taken a contrary view which came before this Court and the view taken in favour of the assessee is upheld by this Court. 9. We have heard learned advocate Mr. Soparkar for the assessee. The facts of the case are that since the profit which was shown by the appellant as income from business, the appellate Tribunal has committed error to shift it to income from other sources. It should have been assessed under the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
