9911796707
TMI Blog1956 (1) TMI 37X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' business as comprised in the respondent's business in sewing machines and accessories in which it made profits in 1949? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the respondent was entitled to carry forward and set off under section 24(2), Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the unabsorbed loss in sale of shares in 1948 against the profits of the machinery business in 1949. The assessee in this case is a private limited company carrying on business in sewing machines and accessories under the name and style of the Pfaff Sewing Machine Co., (India) Ltd. It was incorporated in the year 1933, and was being assessed at Lahore till the assessment year 1947-48. The company was formed, as its name indicates, to deal pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e's business in sewing machines and accessories in the year 1949 on the ground that the business of the assessee was that of merchants who purchase and sell not only sewing machines and accessories but also stocks and shares and consequently that the assessee was entitled to set off the loss under the head business carried forward from 1949-50, against any profits under the head business for the 1950-51 assessment. The Income-tax Officer was unable to accept the proposition that the loss pertained to the business that was being carried by the assessee. He accordingly disallowed the claim and his order in this behalf was affirmed by the Assistant Commissioner in appeal. The Appellate Tribunal however came to a contrary conclusion. Wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the business of sewing machines in the assessment year 1950-51? The Tribunal declined to accede to this request as it was of the opinion that the finding of the Tribunal that the investment in stocks and shares was in the course of the original business of the assessee which did not change its shape at any time was a pure finding of fact from which no question of law arose. The Commissioner of Income-tax is dissatisfied with this order and prays that the Appellate Tribunal be required to state that case and to refer the two questions which have been set out at the commencement of this order. The learned counsel for the Department has put forward several arguments in support of his contention that this is not a finding of fact. It is s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id not make the two businesses the same. These arguments cannot bear a moment's scrutiny. It has been held repeatedly that the finding whether two businesses are separate businesses or are two branches of the same business is a finding of fact which cannot be the foundation for a question of law. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion, with which I find myself in agreement, that the company in the present case was formed with the object not only of dealing in the import and distribution of sewing machines but also in the sale and purchase of stocks and shares. Ever since the year 1933, the company has been purchasing and selling shares and the assessment for the year 193637 shows a profit of ₹ 223. Later, however, it found tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
