9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the action of the Ld. A.O. in making an addition of Rs. 29,84,052/- by denying the claim of set off of loss of share business allegedly in view of Explanation to section - 73 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of Ld. CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs. 29,84,052/- is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3) That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. A.O. in passing the impugned order without giving adequate opportunity of being heard. 4) That in any case and in any view of the matter, action of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on India Ltd. vs. ACIT, contended that the issue in controversy is covered in favour of the assessee company. The Ld. CIT(A) has denied the claim of set off of loss of share business to the assessee by relying upon decision rendered by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI VS. DLF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS LIMITED (218 taxman 0045). 7. However the Co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in assessee's own case for 2009-10 has distinguished the judgment of DLF Commercial (supra) followed by Ld. CIT(A) and allowed the claim of set off of to the assessee on account of loss of share business by relying upon decision rendered by High Court of Calcutta cited as Asian Financial Services Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Act, Cal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out of deemed business set off against the income arising out of business proper unless otherwise provided. The question however remains whether the explanation to Sub- Section (4) of Section 73 relied upon by Mr. Lodh provides otherwise. A plain reading of the explanation quoted above cannot be said to have provided otherwise. In that case the irresistible conclusion is that the assessee is entitled to set off such loss arising out of deemed business against the income arising out of business proper. The learned Tribunal has supported the contention of the revenue relying upon the judgment of the Delhi High Court quoted above. The views expressed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court are contained in a part of the sentence, which is as fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 271(1)(a)(i) by the parties would lead to some inconvenient result, but the duty of the Court is to read the section, understand its language and give effect to the same. If the language is plain, the fact that the consequence of giving effect to it may lead to some absurd result is not a factor to be taken into account in interpreting a provision. It is for the legislature to step in and remove the absurdity. On the other hand, if two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible, that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted. This is a well-accepted rule of construction recognised by this Court in several of its decisions. Hence, all that we have to see is, what is the true effect of the language employed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
