TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh Dubey, Sr. DR. ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU, JM: This appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the impugned order dated 28.6.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-4, New Delhi, in relation to assessment year 2016-17 on the following grounds:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances and in law, the impugned order dated Assessee by Sh. Nitin Gulati, Adv. Department by Sh. Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR. 17.12.2018 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is without jurisdiction, illegal, bad in law and void ab initio. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in upholding the findings of the Ld. Assessing Officer who had erred in holding that the assessee is still in the process of setting up of business and therefore the business of the assessee has not commenced during the year. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in confirming the disallowance of the claim of business loss made by the assessee in return of the income. 4. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CITA (A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the findings of the Ld. Assessing Officer who had erred in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view that assessee filed details vide letter dated 12.11.2018 wherein purchase and sale of goods (Harpic) stated to have made from M/s Shyn Industries on 19.5.2015 of ₹ 5063/- and M/s A B Housekeepers Pvt. Ltd. on 25.5.2015 for ₹ 5175/- respectively. Assessee has explained about setting up and commencement of business and concluded stating that the business of the assessee is duly set up as well commenced in the concerned assessment year as the assessee effectuated the sale and purchase during the concerned assessment year. The sales or purchase in miniscule having regard to expenditure incurred did not disentitle the assessee that such expenditure would be disallowed. Considering the facts of the case the assessee is only shown single purchase and sale during the first quarter, thereafter no business transaction to generate revenue has been made in the whole financial year. This shows the transaction was not related to business and the nature of expense debited in the P L account also does not relates to business operations rather it is of in the nature of carrying out research and analysis, feasibility for the business i.e. activity prior to setting up and commencemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l there should be series of transactions, both of purchase and of sale to constitute trade, as the case of the assessee. Therefore, he stated that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the aforesaid decision of the ITAT, Delhi Bench ITO vs. Amrit Foods (P) Ltd.(Supra). 3.1 Ld. Counsel for the assessee further stated that assessee company was incorporated on 05.10.2011 under the Companies Act, 1956 with the name Asset Infra Development Ltd. . Thereafter the name of the company was changed to IFFCO EBazar Ltd. by a Special Resolution passed in the Extra Ordinary Meeting (EGM) dated 25.3.2015 which was duly accepted by the Registrar of Companies. He further stated that in addition to the expense that had been incurred by the assessee in connection with setting up of the business, assessee also in the first of Quarter of 2015 purchased its various fixed assets such as computer and other peripherals through the invoices which are placed on record with the written submissions of the assessee. He specifically argued that assessee has commenced its business in the said assessment year, as the assessee has made its sale of goods i.e. Harpic and purchase its evident ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the case as explained above and the transaction made by the assessee during the assessment year in dispute details of the same are reproduced above as well as in view of the ITAT B Bench, Delhi decision in the case of ITO vs. Amrit Foods (P) Ltd. (1984) 10 ITD 681 (Delhi) dated 12.3.1984 (Supra), wherein it was held as under:- It is well settled that even a single transaction may constitute business as defined in section 2(13). It is not essential that there should be a series of transactions, both of purchase and sale to constitute trade. Even a single purchase followed by a single sale, may be regarded as business and a single such transaction outside an assessee s line of business an adventure in the nature of trade. Neither repetition nor continuity of similar transactions is necessary to constitute a transaction an adventure in the nature of trade. It is also well settled that where a purchase is made with the intention of resale, it depends upon the conduct of the assesse and the circumstances of the case whether the venture is on capital account or in the nature of trade. In the instant case, certain facts admitted proved on record were (i) that the assessee, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
