9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /assessee. - ITA 596/2012 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2013 - Badar Durrez Ahmed And Vibhu Bakhru,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Karan Khanna, Adv. with Ms Ashmita Kumar, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr Piyush Kaushik, Adv. JUDGMENT Badar Durrez Ahmed, J (Oral) 1. This is an appeal by the revenue against the order dated 28.12.2011 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, in ITA No. 3276/Del/11 relating to the assessment year 2008-09. The appeal was admitted for hearing on 15.10.2012. The order indicates that the following question of law arises for consideration:- Whether the Tribunal fell into error in directing that the sum of Rs. 39,52,293/-, added by the Assessing Officer, was covered by the disclosure made by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from trading in commodities amounting to Rs. 39,52,293/- against business income. The Assessing Officer treated that such loss is of speculative nature, hence could not be set off against business income. He, therefore, added the said sum to the income of the assessee and has assessed the income of the assessee at Rs. 18,77,40,980/-. The addition was challenged by the assessee before the CIT(A). It was contended that the assessee had transferred 58 flats having mutually agreed value at Rs. 18,08,31,794/- in favour of M/s BLK Reality Pvt. Ltd. Against which claim of having incurred Rs. 17 crore on various projects of the assessee company. The assessee company recognized total value of sales of such flats in its profits and loss account at R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee of Rs. 1,41,68,206/- which did not exceed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs. 39,52,293/-, the addition made by the Assessing Officer was not called for. It is against these findings recorded by the CIT (A), the department has filed the aforementioned grounds of appeal. 4. The argument of the revenue is that the sum of Rs. 39,52,293/- was by way of speculation loss and therefore the said amount had to be added back to the business income of the assessee. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondent/assessee contended that the said sum of Rs. 39,52,293/- was already embedded in the additional business income which was offered by the respondent/ assessee which was to the extent of Rs.1,41,68,206/-. The T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
