9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (3) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion under section 80M of the Act without taking into account relief granted to it under section 80K of the Act." The learned counsel for the appellant at the outset stated that this was covered against the assessee by the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jeewan Ltd. v. ITO [1986] 15 ITD 14 (Bom.). He, however, hastened to add that the appeal had been filed with a view to keep the matter alive. The learned D.R. on the other hand strongly supported the order of the CIT (Appeals). 2.1 In view of the aforesaid accepted position we see no reason to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority and reject the relevant ground in the appeal. 3. The only issue which now survives for our consideration is the on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... colourable device. In view of the finding given, the loss of Rs. 6,96,856 on the sale of shares of Sarayu Investment Pvt.Ltd. is disallowed as not genuine loss." 4. The CIT (Appeals) upheld the decision taken by the ITO agreeing with him in toto vis-a-vis the non-genuine nature of the transaction and avoiding the payment of tax. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant at the outset vehemently challenged the action of the tax authorities in rejecting the claim and also recording in the process certain observations which were based on extraneous considerations and not relevant to the issue in question. According to the learned counsel the transaction was not only genuine in nature but had been undertaken in the interest of the assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... payment of tax then these investments could have also been sold off during the assessment year under consideration and the long-term capital gains earned thereof be set off against the long-term capital loss incurred on the sale of shares of M/s. Sarayu Inv. Pvt. Ltd. This, according to him, however, was not done. He also invited our attention to the fact that the penalty proceedings initiated under section 271(1)(c) vis-a-vis the rejection of the claim in question had been subsequently dropped vide order dt. 3-3-88 by the ITO himself. The learned counsel also made a statement at the bar to the effect that the question of "tax avoidance" would lose importance since the long-term capital loss if treated as genuine and allowed, would lapse in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim was that no "reasons" for selling these shares had been given by the assessee-company. This approach of the department, according to us, is not justified since it is the prerogative of a businessman as to how he should plan his affairs and what he should sell and what he should purchase. It was with this intention that the company disposed of the shares of M/s. Sarayu Inv. P. Ltd. and on which no dividend had been declared for the last so many years. (4) The charge of "tax evasion" levelled by the tax authorities is also not valid and borne out by the facts specially when one finds that the shares of M/s. Bakubhai Ambalal Ltd. (London) were disposed of after receiving permission from the Central Government in January 1983 the applic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
