KARSAM INVESTMENT P. LTD, MUMBAI v. ITO WD 9(2)(2), MUMBAI

ITA 7187/MUM/2010 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 25-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 718719914 RSA 2010
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 7187/MUM/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
Appellant KARSAM INVESTMENT P. LTD, MUMBAI
Respondent ITO WD 9(2)(2), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 25-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted SMC
Tribunal Order Date 25-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 18-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 18-01-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 19-10-2010
Judgment Text
I.T.A NO.7187/ MUM/2010 KARSAM INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH MUMBAI. [ BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] I.T.A NO.7187/ MUM/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2007-08 KARSAM INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED .. APPELLANT A/24 DHIRAJ APARTMENT PODDAR MARG MALAD(WEST) MUMBAI-97 PA NO.AABCK 6500 D VS INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 9(2)(2) . RESPONDEN T MUMBAI. APPEARANCES: MEENA SHAH FOR THE APPELLANT MALTHI R SRIDHARAN FOR THE RESPONDENT O R D E R 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL THE ASSESSEE HAS CHALLE NGED CORRECTNESS OF CIT(A)S ORDER DATED 11 TH AUGUST 2010 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN REJECTING THE APPEAL ON THE GRO UND THAT NO MATERIAL HAS BEEN PLACED ON RECORD TO PROVE THE APP ELLANTS CLAIM WITHOUT GIVING AN OPPORTUNITY TO PRODUCE THE SAME. THOUGH THE COPY OF THE LEDGER ACCOUNT AND COPIES OF BILLS WERE PRODUCED TO HIM DURING THE HEARING AND XEROX COPIES WERE SUBMITTED TO THE CIT(A) I.T.A NO.7187/ MUM/2010 KARSAM INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED 2 AFTER THE HEARING. HOWEVER IT SEEMS THAT THE SAME WERE NOT KEPT IN THE FILE WHILE HE WAS DECIDING THE MATTER. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A ND IN LAW THE LD CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ADDITION OF ` .2 46 872 ON ACCOUNT OF SPECULATION LOSS EVEN THOUGH THE SAME WAS INCORRECT AS THE APPELLANT HAD EARNED SPECULATION PROFIT ALSO IN THE SAME YEAR AND AT NET LEVEL THERE IS AN INCOME FROM SPECULATION BU SINESS DURING THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL EVEN AFTER SETTING OFF OF THE DIS ALLOWED LOSS OF ` .2 46 872. 3. APPELLANT HAD EARNED SPECULATION INCOME OF ` .4 45 754.78 IN COMMODITIES TRADING DURING THE YEAR UNDER REFERENCE AND HAVE INCURRED A SPECULATION LOSS IN SHARES OF ` .2 46 872.39 IN INTRADAY SHARE TRADING BUSINESS. THUS AS NET LEVEL THERE IS A PROFIT AFTER REDUCING THE LOSS FROM THE PROFIT. HOWEVER CONTRA RY TO THE FACTS THE SPECULATION LOSS FIGURE IS DISALLOWED WITHOUT CONSI DERING THE SET OFF AGAINST SPECULATION PROFIT OF THE YEAR. 2. WHEN THIS APPEAL WAS CALLED OUT FOR HEARING LEA RNED COUNSEL PRAYED FOR RESTORATION OF APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) AS THE SHORT GROUND THAT THE SET OFF OF SPECULATION LOSS AGAINST SPECULATION PROFITS HAS NO T BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE CIT (A) EVEN THOUGH ALL THE RELEVANT DETAILS WERE PLACED BE FORE HIM. SHE SUBMITS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED PROFITS FROM SPECULATIVE ACTIVI TIES IN COMMODITIES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO BE SET OFF AGAINST SPECULATION LOSSES I N SHARES BUT THIS ASPECT OF THE MATTER HAS NOT BEEN EXAMINED AT ALL BY ANY OF THE A UTHORITIES BELOW. 3. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED UPON THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW AND DID NOT SERIOUSLY OBJECT TO T HE MATTER BEING RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR LIMITED ADJUDICATION ON THIS ASP ECT OF THE MATTER. 4. HAVING REGARD TO THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND HAVIN G PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD I DEEM IT FIT AND PROPER TO REMIT THE MATTE R TO THE FILE OF THE CIT (A) FOR ADJUDICATION ON THIS LIMITED ASPECT OF THE MATTER AFTER GIVING A FRESH OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND BY WAY OF A SPEAKING ORDER. I ORDER SO. I.T.A NO.7187/ MUM/2010 KARSAM INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED 3 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES IN THE TERMS INDICATED ABOVE. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ON 25 TH JANUARY 2011 SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MUMBAI DATED 25 TH JANUARY 2011 PARIDA COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 20 MUMBAI 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 9 MUMBAI 5. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE BENCH SMC MUMBAI //TRUE COPY// BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI I.T.A NO.7187/ MUM/2010 KARSAM INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED 4