1970 (2) TMI 11 - HC - Income Tax

Sale proceeds of rice were received from the Govt. in the form of cheque - cheque was duly deposited and an amount of Rs. 23,000 was withdrawn in cash for disbursement, which disbursement was to be necessary for the business - held that sum of Rs. 23,000 is deductible in computing the income of the assessee

Summary

Issues:
Whether the sum of Rs. 23,000 is deductible in computing the income of the assessee?

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh involved a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the deductibility of Rs. 23,000 in the income computation of the assessee for the assessment year 1962-63. The respondent, a registered firm operating a rice mill, claimed the amount as a loss in business after one of its partners lost the cash while traveling back from depositing a cheque issued by the Government. The Income-tax Officer and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner initially rejected the claim, but the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal allowed it based on legal precedents. The court referred to various legal cases to establish the principles governing the deduction of losses in business, emphasizing the need for the loss to be connected with or arising out of the business affairs and be incidental to the business for deduction under section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.

The court cited cases such as Curtis v. J. and G. Oldfield Ltd., Badridas Daga v. Commissioner of Income-tax, and Motipur Sugar Factory Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax to establish the criteria for determining a loss as a trading loss and deductible as a loss in business. The judgment highlighted the importance of the loss being incidental to the conduct of the trade and connected to the business affairs of the assessee for eligibility for deduction. The court also referenced the pronouncements of the Supreme Court in Badridas Daga v. Commissioner of Income-tax and Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nainital Bank Ltd., which approved the deductibility of losses caused by employee defalcation or theft as trading losses.

The court analyzed the facts of the case, where the partner withdrew Rs. 23,000 for business disbursement, but lost the amount due to theft on the return journey. The court found that these facts aligned with the principles established in the legal precedents, making the loss incidental to the business. The court dismissed the department's challenge to the facts presented by the Tribunal, emphasizing that objections should have been raised earlier in the proceedings. Ultimately, the court held that the Rs. 23,000 was deductible as a loss in business under section 10(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and directed the petitioner to bear the costs of the court.

In conclusion, the judgment provided a detailed analysis of the legal principles governing the deductibility of losses in business, emphasizing the need for losses to be connected with the business affairs and incidental to the business for eligibility for deduction. The court's decision in this case highlighted the application of these principles to the specific facts presented and affirmed the deductibility of the Rs. 23,000 loss in the income computation of the assessee.