9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves the following issues: 1. Whether the Tribunal's finding on the genuineness of the loss incurred by the assessee in share dealings is based on evidence or unreasonable and perverse. 2. Whether the losses disallowed by the Income-tax Officer and confirmed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in share dealings were justified or based on presumption. Judgment Details: Issue 1: The Tribunal allowed the claim of loss for the assessees in share dealings, overturning the disallowance by the Income-tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Tribunal's decision was based on the fact that the loss incurred in share dealings was not staged or to divert income, but a genuine result of market conditions. The Tribunal found that the non-production of share brokers by the assessee did not disentitle them from claiming the loss in a genuine transaction of shares. The High Court, in line with its earlier decision in a similar case, affirmed the Tribunal's finding as being based on material evidence and not perverse. Issue 2: The second issue raised was whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that the findings of the Income-tax Officer and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) were based on presumption rather than facts and evidence. The High Court ruled in favor of the assessee, stating that the disallowance of losses in share dealings was not warranted by facts and evidence on record, and that the Tribunal's decision was not based on presumption. The reference application for both assessees was disposed of accordingly, with the judgment favoring the assessee and going against the Revenue. This judgment highlights the importance of evidence and material facts in determining the genuineness of losses incurred in share dealings, emphasizing that non-production of share brokers does not automatically disqualify a claim for loss in such transactions.
|
