Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur V. M/s Universal Subscription Agency Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur

ITA 674/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 100343 (ITAT-LUCKNOW)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 10-07-2015
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-08-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: HARISH GIDWANI
• Keywords: Speculation loss

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.674/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2005 06 DCIT RANGE - 6, KANPUR VS. M/S UNIVERSAL SUBSCRIPTION AGENCY PVT. LTD., 113/233, SWAROOP NAGAR, KANPUR 208002. PAN:AAACU1756G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI HARISH GIDWANI, SR. D.R. RESPONDENT BY SHRI SWARN SINGH, C. A SHRI UMANG JAIN, ADVOCATE DATE OF HEARING 10/07/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 2 0 /08/2015 O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THIS IS REVENUES APPEAL DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD CIT(A) - I KANPUR, DATED 12.05.2014 FOR A.Y. 2005 06. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 4 GROUNDS BUT THE ONLY GRIEVANCE OF THE ASSESSEE IS REGARDING RELIEF ALLOWED BY CIT (A) IN RESPECT OF SET OFF OF B/F SPECULATION LOSS OF RS. 19,81,205/ - . 3. LEARNED DR OF THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT (A). HE ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON A JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LOKMAT NEWSPAPERS (P) LTD., 189 TAXMAN 370. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE ONLY OBJECTION OF THE A.O. IS THIS THAT AS PE R EXPLANATION TO SECTION 73, LOSS IN 2 SHARE BUSINESS IS DEEMED AS SPECULATION LOSS BUT PROFIT FROM SUCH BUSINESS CANNOT BE DEEMED AS SPECULATION PROFIT BECAUSE IT IS NOT SO STATED IN THE SAID EXPLANATION. AS PER THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT CIT ED BY LEARNED AR OF THE ASSESSEE, THAT THERE IS NO RESTRICTION FOUND IN THE EXPLANATION TO SECTION 73 TO EXCLUDE THOSE BUSINESS WHERE PROFIT HAS ARISEN. SET O F F OF B/F SPECULATION WAS ALLOWED IN THAT CASE. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THIS JUDGMENT, WE DECLINE TO IN TERFERE IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A). 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 2 0 /08/2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR