Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (1) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (1) TMI 242 - AT - Income Tax


Issues:
1. Disallowance of loss due to embezzlement during share trading business.
2. Disallowance of interest on margin funding in Future and Option Trading of Share.

Issue 1: Disallowance of loss due to embezzlement during share trading business:
The appellant, an individual advocate, filed a return of income for A.Y. 2009-10 declaring a total income of ?4,33,400, claiming a deduction of ?15,80,125 as a loss from share trading. The appellant alleged that M/s. Religare Securities Ltd. carried out unauthorized transactions resulting in a loss of ?15,80,213.70, which should be allowed as a deduction. The AO disallowed ?7,13,392 of the loss, as evidence for this portion was not furnished. The CIT(A) upheld this decision. On appeal, the Tribunal allowed the claim, considering an arbitrator's award stating that the loss was due to negligence by M/s. Religare Securities Ltd. The Tribunal found the evidence sufficient to prove the loss and allowed it as a deduction.

Issue 2: Disallowance of interest on margin funding in Future and Option Trading of Share:
The appellant claimed a deduction of ?85,743 as interest paid to IL & FS for margin funding in Future and Option Trading. The AO disallowed this amount as it was capitalized as part of the investment. The CIT(A) rejected the claim, citing the absence of an auditor's certificate supporting the revised balance sheet. The Tribunal, however, allowed the claim, directing the AO to allow the interest as a revenue expenditure. The appellant agreed not to claim this interest as a cost of investment in the future. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed this ground of appeal.

In conclusion, the appeal by the appellant was partly allowed, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the appellant on both issues.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates