1993 (5) TMI 2 - HC - Income Tax

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether income from brokerage should be assessed as professional income or business income.

Summary:

Issue 1: Whether income from brokerage should be assessed as professional income or business income.
The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal referred the question of whether income from brokerage should be assessed as professional income and not business income. The assessee derived income from brokerage of different commodities, which was initially considered business income by the assessing officer. The assessee claimed it as professional income, but this claim was rejected by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Jaipur. The Tribunal later held that earning income from brokerage required personal skill and manual skill, thus qualifying it as professional income.

The Department argued that brokerage income is business income, not professional income, as professional income pertains to fields like medicine, law, and architecture, which require specialized qualifications. The Tribunal's test of skill application was deemed incorrect by the Department.

The court examined definitions of "business" and "profession" u/s 2(13) of the Act and various judicial interpretations. It was noted that "business" is broader than "profession," which involves intellectual or manual skill controlled by intellectual skill. The court emphasized that skill and ability alone do not determine whether an activity is a business or profession; qualifications and specialized training are also necessary.

The Tribunal's reliance on a judgment regarding auctioneers was found inapplicable to brokers. Definitions from Black's Law Dictionary and other legal sources were considered, highlighting that a profession involves specialized knowledge and training, which was not established for brokers in this case.

The Supreme Court's judgment in Lakshminarayan Ram Gopal and Son Ltd. v. Government of Hyderabad was cited, where agency activities were deemed business. Similarly, brokerage activities, often under agreements, were considered business activities. The Tribunal's conclusion based on skill alone was insufficient without evidence of special qualifications.

The court concluded that the Tribunal was not justified in assessing brokerage income as professional income. The reference was answered in favor of the Department, ruling that brokerage income should be assessed as business income.

No order as to costs.