9911796707
TMI Blog1942 (10) TMI 10X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rangoon in partnership with the S. P. K. A. firm. The firm composed of the assessee and the S. P. K. A. firm was known as the S. P. K. A. A. M. firm. On the 14th March 1929, the S. P. K. A. A. M. firm and another Chettiar firm carrying on business in Rangoon, styled the O. N. R. M. M. firm, entered into a lease of a building in Mogul Street, Rangoon, at a rent of ₹ 3,000 per month. Chettiars ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... him the sum of ₹ 1,98,650 by way of rent, compensation and damages. Each of the sub-lessees had agreed to pay a proportion of the rent and to reimburse and indemnify the lessees in respect of any liability arising under the lease. The S. P. K. A. A. M. firm paid the landlord the ₹ 1,98,650 between January 1935 and June 1936 and then dissolved. In 1937 the assessee and the S. P. K. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e objected and asked the Commissioner of Income-tax to state a case. He refused to do so, but was directed by this Court to make this reference under Section 66(3) of the Indian Income- tax Act. The question referred reads as follows:- Whether the petitioner was not entitled on the facts and in the circumstances of the case to claim a deduction of ₹ 22,712 and ₹ 1,335 in the compu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is being the case the loss suffered could not be treated as a business loss. As it was not a business loss it could only be regarded as a capital loss. The fact that the assessee chose to write off the amount in the books kept by him in connection with his money-lending business does not make any difference. The question referred will be answered accordingly. The assessee must pay the costs, &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
