M/s ECONIUM INVESTMENTS & FINANCE LTD, Mumbai V. DCIT 3(1), Mumbai

ITA 5605/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1621 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-10-2009
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: E
• Next Hearing Date: 20-10-2009
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 04-09-2008
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR U ANJANEYULU
• Keywords: Business income

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL E BENCH: MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND V D RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO 5605/MUM/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005-06) M/S ECONIUM INVESTMENTS AND FINANCE LTD, BAJAU BHAVAN, 3RD FLOOR, JAMNALAL BAJAJ MARG, 226, NARIMAN POINT, MUMBAI -400 021 PAN: AAACE 2787 A VS DCIT -3(1), ROOM NO 607, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, M K ROAD, MUMBAI -400 020 APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI PARAS SAVLA RESPONDENT BY: DR U ANJANEYULU ORDER PER PRAMOD KUMAR , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, ASSESSEE HAD CHALLENGED C ORRECTNESS OF CIT (A)S ORDER DATED 12TH JUNE 2008 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-0 6. GRIEVANCE RAISED IN THE APPEAL WAS THAT CIT (A) OUGHT TO HAVE HELD THAT THE LOSS OF RS 4,44,19,296 INCURRED ON DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF STOCK IS A BUSINESS LOSS. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITS THAT WH ETHER LOSS ARISING ON ACCOUNT OF DIMINUTION IN VALUE OF SHARES IS TO BE TREATED A S A CAPITAL LOSS OR AS A BUSINESS LOSS, BUT IN VIEW OF THE FACT THAT SUCH A BUSINESS LOSS, EVEN IF IT IS SO HELD TO BE BUSINESS LOSS, WILL BE TREATED AS A SPECULATION BUS INESS LOSS AND AS THE ASSESSEE NEITHER HAS A SPECULATION BUSINESS INCOME NOR DOES HE FORESEE ANY SPECULATION BUSINESS INCOME IN TIMES TO COME, THE ISSUE RAISED IN APPEAL IS WHOLLY ACADEMIC. HE FURTHER STATES THAT THIS SITUATION HAS ARISEN ON AC COUNT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURTS JUDGMENT DATED 20.3.2009 IN THE CASE OF M/S PRASAD AGENTS PVT LTD VS INCOME TAX OFFICER. 3. IT IS THUS SUBMITTED THAT IN VIEW OF THE FACTS N ARRATED ABOVE THE ASSESSEE IS WITHDRAWING THE APPEAL. THIS ACT OF WITHDRAWAL OF APPEAL SHOULD, HOWEVER, NOT BE M/S ECONIUM INVESTMENTS AND FINANCE LTD 2 PUT TO HIS DISADVANTAGE IN DECIDING THE PENALTY ISS UE, IF AT ALL SO PURSUED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, RELATING TO THIS QUANTUM ADDITIO N. 4. LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY ACCEP TS BENCHS SUGGESTION OF INCORPORATING THE ABOVE SUBMISSION IN OUR ORDER, DI SMISSING THE APPEAL, SO AS THE ASSESSEES STAND IS DULY PLACED ON RECORD. 5. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 22 DAY O F OCTOBER 2009. SD/- (V D RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/- (PRAMOD KUMAR) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATE: 22 OCTOBER 2009 COPY TO:- 1) THE APPELLANT. 2) THE RESPONDENT. 3) THE CIT (A)-XXVIII, MUMBAI. 4) THE CIT3, MUMBAI. 5) THE D.R. E BENCH, ITAT, MUMBAI. BY ORDER / / TRUE COPY / / ASSTT. REGISTRAR CHAVAN* I.T.A.T., MUMBAI M/S ECONIUM INVESTMENTS AND FINANCE LTD 3 SR.N. EPISODE OF AN ORDER DATE INITIALS CONCERNED 1 DRAFT DICTATED ON 21.10.09 SR.PS 2 DRAFT PLACED BEFORE AUTHOR 21.10.09 SR.PS 3 DRAFT PROPOSED & PLACED BEFORE THE SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 4 DRAFT DISCUSSED/APPROVED BY SECOND MEMBER JM/AM 5 APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR.PS SR.PS 6 KEPT FOR PRONOUNCEMENT ON SR.PS 7 FILE SENT TO THE BENCH CLERK SR.PS 8 DATE ON WHICH FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK 9 DATE OF DISPATCH OF ORDER