9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent. ORDER 1. The Revenue has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 16.11.2007 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in ITA No 2209/Del./2004 pertaining to the assessment year 1998-99. 2. The only issue which arose before the Tribunal was whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the 'CIT(A)'] had misdirected itself in law in deleting the disallowance of interest claimed by the assessee as deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against share trading business. The Assessing Officer had disallowed the deduction and hence added back the deduction by way of interest amountin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... genuinely engaged in the business of trading in shares. The CIT(A) also noted that the assessee had earned profits from trading in shares. He noted that the assessee had earned profits amounting to Rs 19,84,000/-. The assessee's explanation with respect to this aspect of the matter as well as the fact that it had been doing business of trading in shares which had resulted in generation of funds is noted extensively in paragraph 4.9 of the impugned order, as also, the fact that the assessee had claimed that funds had been generated as a result of monies received from two concerns, namely, M/s Creative Impex and M/s Jalaveg investments, which was, used to invest in shares of Oswal Agro Mills Ltd and not the loan raised by the assessee. The CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee for making investment in the shares of M/s Oswal Agro Mills Ltd. It also sustained the finding of the CIT(A) that assessee has been trading in shares both in the earlier years as well as during the year under consideration. 5. Having heard Mr R.D. Jolly, learned counsel for the Revenue we are of the view that no fault can be found with the impugned judgment. The Tribunal having confirmed finding of fact of the CIT(A) that assessee was genuinely in the business of trading in shares and that the Revenue had not produced any material to discharge its onus that the borrowed funds on which interest has been claimed as deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act was utilized for the purposes of investment in shares of M/s Oswal A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
