9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Assessment of bad debt claim in relation to chit funds participation and loss incurred by the assessee. Analysis: The appeal was filed by the assessee against the Commissioner (Appeals) order regarding the assessment year 1976-77. The assessee, a private limited company involved in the business of grinding wheels and machine tools, joined four chit funds in 1972. During the relevant previous year, the assessee claimed a loss of Rs. 16,318 due to withdrawing from the chit funds because of the deteriorating financial condition of the fund organizer. The Income Tax Officer (ITO) disallowed the claim, stating that the assessee was not engaged in banking or money-lending business, and a director of the assessee was also a director of the chit fund company. Additionally, the ITO highlighted that no legal action was taken to recover the amount and that the assessee had taken a loan of Rs. 35,000 during the year, questioning the reason for the claimed loss. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (AAC), who disallowed the loss, stating that the company was not authorized for money-lending activities, and thus, the loss was on the capital account. The representative for the assessee argued that the chit fund participation was a business activity, explaining the functioning of chit funds and the circumstances leading to the loss incurred by the assessee. The department's representative contended that the chit fund activity was not a business but a means of raising funds on interest, and the loss was on the capital account. The tribunal analyzed the contentions of both parties and the nature of chit fund operations. It determined that chit funds primarily function as a means to raise funds on interest, with no element of profit or prize involved. The tribunal noted that the dividends received by the assessee from the chit funds were erroneously taxed as business income in previous years. Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Karnani Properties Ltd. v. CIT, the tribunal concluded that the chit fund activities did not constitute a business as they lacked the element of profit-making. Therefore, the loss incurred was deemed to be on the capital account and not connected to the assessee's primary business activities. The tribunal upheld the revenue authorities' decision to disallow the bad debt claim. Regarding the additional ground raised by the assessee, the tribunal declined to admit it, as it required investigation into fresh facts related to the transfer of a capital asset, which were not presented in the record. Consequently, the tribunal dismissed the appeal, upholding the revenue authorities' decision.
|
