TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 1290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r sources; respectively. We thus are of the opinion that once the assessee's impugned deficit arising from mutuality account is neither covered in any of the said heads as well nor u/s. 2(24)(vii) defining income in the very account, section 71 of the Act would not apply in isolation. We further deem it proper to refer to hon'ble apex court s recent larger bench decision in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar Co [ 2018 (7) TMI 1826 - SUPREME COURT] that provisions of a taxing statutes have to be strictly construed only. As in CIT Vs. Hariprasad and Co. P. Ltd.case [ 1975 (2) TMI 2 - SUPREME COURT] that a loss arising from a head of income not chargeable to tax is not eligible to be set off against a taxable source - As per Kishorebhai Bikabhai Virani case [ 2015 (2) TMI 807 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] a loss under an exempt source is not to be carried forward for set off against subsequent year s income. CIT(A) had been directed to consider the assessee s going by the corresponding statutory provisions in light of relevant facts rather than allowing the same on merits. We further make it clear that the assessee had raised the impugned argument for the first time be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 12 1400/Hyd/2015 2010-11 CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad; 30.09.2015; No.0175A/2012-13 / CIT(A)-VI/15-16 143(3) rws 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961. 13 940/Hyd/2015 2011-12 CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad; 27.02.2015; 0533/2014-15/ITO, Wd.10(2)/CIT(A)-4 / Hyd/2014- 15 143(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961. 14 941/Hyd/2015 2012-13 CIT(A)-4, Hyderabad; 27.02.2015; 0532/2014-15/ITO, Wd.10(2)/CIT(A)-4 / Hyd/2014- 15 -do- 15 1103/Hyd/2018 2014-15 CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad; 16.02.2018; 0416/2016-17/A3/ CIT(A)-6 -do- 16 1696/Hyd/2018 2015-16 CIT(A)-6, Hyderabad; 04.05.2018; 10251/2017-18/ B2/ CIT(A)-6 -do- Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. Both the learned representatives are ad-idem during the course of hearing that all these instant sixteen appeals raise almost an identical issue on law and on facts. They next submitted that the assessee s appeal 1388/Hyd/2015 may be tak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r set off against profit of other units under the same head. Learned counsel next cited CIT(Exemption) Vs. Dawat E. Hadiyah ITA No.741 755/2016 dt.3.12.2018; CIT Vs. Institute of Banking Personnel Selection (2003) 264 ITR 110 (Bom) affirmed in (2018) 89 taxman.com 127 (SC); CIT Vs. Rajasthan Gujarati Charitable Trust that an income derived from trust s activities has to be computed as per normal commercial principles only. Meaning thereby that set off of expenses against income of subsequent year s is duly allowable. Learned counsel lastly referred to DIT (Exemption) Vs. M/s. Najam Baug Trust ITA No.69/2013 dt.14.01.2015 reiterating the very proposition. Mr. Firose accordingly closed his arguments that the clinching issue herein as to whether section 71 is applicable regarding set off assessee's loss / deficit in mutuality against its interest income from Other sources stands settled to rest by the learned co-ordinate bench remand directions (supra). 6. The Revenue has drawn strong support from CIT(A) s order under challenge declining the impugned set off arising from mutuality account deficit against the assessee's interest income of ₹ 41,15,158 treated as i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken as any of the five heads of income provided u/s. 14 of the Act i.e. salary, income from house property, profits and gains of business or profession, capital gains and income from other sources; respectively. We thus are of the opinion that once the assessee's impugned deficit arising from mutuality account is neither covered in any of the said heads as well nor u/s. 2(24)(vii) defining income in the very account, section 71 of the Act would not apply in isolation. We further deem it proper to refer to hon'ble apex court s recent larger bench decision in Commissioner of Customs Vs. Dilip Kumar Co. (2018) 9 SCC 1 (SC) that provisions of a taxing statutes have to be strictly construed only. We next quote CIT Vs. Hariprasad and Co. P. Ltd. (1975) 99 ITR 118 (SC) that a loss arising from a head of income not chargeable to tax is not eligible to be set off against a taxable source as follows : It may be remembered that the concept of carry forward of loss does not stand in vacuo. It involves the notion of set off. Its sole purpose is to set off the loss against the profits of a subsequent year. It presupposes the permissibility and possibility of the carried-forwar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ther than allowing the same on merits. We further make it clear that the assessee had raised the impugned argument for the first time before the learned co-ordinate bench wherein it thought it proper to redirect the same back to the CIT(A) for necessary verification and adjudication. We thus decline the assessee's instant solitary substantive grievance as well as the main lead appeal ITA No.1388/Hyd/2015. Same order to follow in assessee's remaining three appeals 1389 1390/Hyd/2015 (heard on 22.09.2021) since learned counsel fairly stated at Bar for all these four cases raise identical substantive grounds. 12. Next comes the assessee's appeals ITA Nos.1392 to 1398/Hyd/2015 (heard on 29.09.2021) wherein learned counsel has made a similar statement that our foregoing adjudication squarely covers the outcome therein. These seven appeals are also dismissed therefore. ITA 940 and 941/Hyd/2015 1103 and 1696/Hyd/2018. 13. Learned counsel next invited our attention to the assessee's four appeals ITA Nos.940 and 941/Hyd/2015 along with 1103 1696/Hyd/2018 for Assessment Years 2011-12, 2012-13, 2014-15 and 2015-16 that the first and foremost foregoing case r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
