No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI MANISH BORAD
आदेश /O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, J.M. : Appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of
Ld. CIT(A)-I, Indore, pertaining to assessment year 2004-
05.
Ground Nos. 2 & 3 are not pressed. Hence, the same 2.
are dismissed as not pressed.
Ground no. 4 is of general nature and does not require 3.
any adjudication.
The only effective ground is ground no.1, which reads 4.
as under :-
“That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 3,78,440/- out of total expenses of Rs. 4,57,450/- being amount debited under the head error and omission by holding that the said expenditure cannot be treated as revenue expenditure and cannot be allowed as business expenditure. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the said amount was rightly claimed as allowable expenditure by the appellant and the disallowance thereof is wrong. It
-: 3 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore is prayed that the said addition may very kindly be deleted.”
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the 5.
assessee is a member of National Stock Exchange. The
main source of income of assessee is Brokerage,
commission and Investment & Trading in Securities. The
assessee has claimed an amount of Rs. 4,57,450/- towards
Error & Omissions account in its profit and loss account.
The AO made query about the nature of account, in
response to which the assessee specifically submitted
before the AO as under :-
Letter dt. 30-11-06
"With respect to your query regarding Error & Omission
Account of Rs. 457450/-, it is submitted that the actual
amount of Error & Omission is Rs. 79010/- only and
the balance amount of Rs.378440/- is actually on
account of settlement which was inadvertently booked
by the assessee in this account. The brief history of the
-: 4 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore case was that a client ( Jagdish Jhawar ) of the
assessee was dealing in Future & Option Markets of
NSE. A perusal of the ledger and contract notes of the
client it will be seen that during the first half of
January the market was very volatile and the client
was suffering losses on the open position. When the
client was asked to furnish additional margin, he was
unable to do so. In order to restrict the loss the
assessee squared up the positions. Immediately on
square off of positions the market bounced back and
the client started nagging the assessee for loss of profit
and blamed the assessee for loss. The assessee on
looking at the future business prospects and in order to
retain the client and his friends had borne the loss to
the extent of Rs. 3,78,440/-.Since the loss is actually
in the nature of settlement the same may please be
allowed. As regards balance amount of Rs. 79010/-
-: 5 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore we have vide our earlier replies have filed the detailed
reply. ”
The AO found that the assessee was not able to 6.
furnish any details or evidence in respect of the
transactions wherein any profit/loss on wrong punching of
order by the terminal order was booked. The AO treated
the loss as speculative loss and the same was disallowed to
the extent it was not set off against the speculation income
of Rs. 65,463/- offered by the assessee. The net
disallowance was calculated at Rs. 3,91,987/- ( Rs. 457450
(-) 65463) on this income and added back to the total
income of the assessee. The assessee preferred an appeal
before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) out of total expenses of
Rs. 4,57,450/- disallowed the amount of Rs. 3,78,440/-
and confirmed the appeal, against which the assessee is in
further appeal before this Tribunal.
-: 6 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the 7.
submissions as made before the Ld. CIT(A-I, which is
placed on record in the paper book at page 51-53. The
Third written submission is reproduced as under :-
THIRD WRITTEN SUBMISSION
During the course of hearing it was observed by Your
Honour that the amount of Rs. 3,91,987/- claimed to
be for business purpose, but does it not amount to an
expenditure of capital in nature in view of the fact that the appellant's income is only from brokerage. In this
respect, it is most humbly reiterated that the amount
claimed by the appellant was incurred solely for business purposes which is allowable u/s 37. It may
be clarified that the appellant had claimed an amount
of Rs. 4,57,450/under the head error and omission,
which the learned AD disallowed treating the same as speculative loss and after allowing set off against the
share trading income (speculation income) of Rs.
-: 7 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore 65,643/disallowed the net loss of Rs. 3,91,987/-. The
major amount claimed by the appellant was Rs.
3,78,440/- which was a credit given to one of the
client namely Shri Jagdish Chand Jhawar on account
of settlement with him, as explained in detail in the
earlier two submissions. 2. It was also explained that the said client suffered
huge losses due to squaring off his existing position by
the appellant in January 2004 after which the said
client stopped trading with the appellant and was also
not making the payments of amounts due from him to
the appellant. The said client lodged a claim of Rs.
7,58,150/- with the appellant in January 2004 itself, which was settled for Rs. 3,78,440/- and credit was given to the client on 10th March 2004 after which the
client resumed trades and the appellant started
earning brokerage, which amounted to Rs. 4,70,363/-
in the immediately succeeding year, in addition to the
-: 8 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore brokerage earned during the impugned year. 3. As rightly observed by Your Honour that the brokerage
income is the major income of the appellant. However,
business claims cannot always be viewed within the
strict barometer of resulting income. Thus, at times
claims of amounts higher than the income earned in
respect there to, have to admitted in view of the
commercial expediency of such claims. It is also an
admitted and settled position that no one else can step
into the shoes of a businessman accept for himself, as
only he knows what decisions are required to be taken
at that particular time under those existing facts and
conditions and in the best interest of the business.
Though at times such business decision may prove to
be wrong, but there can be no denial that at times
business is nothing but an adventure in the nature of
trade. Such business decisions should not be viewed
with suspicion and should always be given due regard
-: 9 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore unless otherwise proved. In the instant case the
decision of settling accounts with the client was very
much a right decision in the interest of the business.
Had the appellant not settled the dispute with the said
client, it would have not only lost the business with
that client forever and also the resultant brokerage
income, but would have also faced litigation which
had its own cost and consequences.
It is a settled position that bad debts claims are also
allowed to share brokers, which claim comprises not
only of brokerage earned but also of other amounts
due from clients which may not have been routed
through profit and loss account. Such claims are
allowed for the simple reason that such losses occur in
the normal course of business and are incidental to the
core business of brokerage and also unavoidable.
Therefore claim of bad debts in the case of brokers has
always been treated as regular revenue expenditure
-: 10 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore and not a capital expenditure. The claim of bad debts has been regularly allowed even in the case of the
appellant in future years at the scrutiny assessment
stage itself. The present case before Your Honour, in
the alternate, can very be equated with the claim of bad debts.
In view of the above submission it is requested that the
claim of the appellant being that of a regular business
expenditure/loss and is not in the nature of capital expenditure/loss, neither in the nature of speculation
loss as held by the learned AO, the same may kindly
be allowed.”
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended that the 8.
assessee is a share broker registered with BSE and NSE.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee took us through page 29
of the paper book, which was the letter addressed to AO
dated 30.11.2006, which is abstracted on page 2 of the
-: 11 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore assessment order that the assessee has incurred an
amount of Rs. 3,78,440/- on account of settlement with
one of its clients, Mr. Jagdish Jhawar. The said client was
suffering losses on its open position in the future and
option market and was not providing requisite margin to
the assessee. The assessee, therefore, squared off the
existing outstanding trades of the client in which the client
suffered losses. Later on the share market recovered and
the client started claiming the losses suffered by him from
the assessee. The assessee looking at the future business
prospects and in order to retain the client agreed to bear
the loss to the extent of Rs. 3,78,440/- and claimed the
same as expenditure. The AO disallowed the said loss
stating that no physical delivery of the shares was affected
and treated the same as speculative loss. The Ld. Counsel
for the assessee further contended that the Ld. CIT(A) has
also discussed the issue on page 18 to 22 of his order
-: 12 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore stating that during the course of appellate proceedings also
the assessee has filed a detailed explanation from where it
was seen that the existing position of the client Mr. Jagdish
Jhawar was squared off in January 2004 and to settle the
matter and maintain trade relationship the assessee agreed
to bear the loss on which settlement was agreed upon in
March 2004 and the amount was claimed as expenditure /
loss. The trades with this client were resumed from
15.03.2004. The assessee has earned brokerage from the
said client immediately in the next year of Rs. 3,29,492/-
in respect of F&O trade and brokerage of Rs. 1,40,870/- in
respect of share trading. Thus, the assessee contended
before the CIT(A) that as a result of settlement the said
client continued the said relationship and the assessee
was able to make good the loss suffered due to settlement
with the client. It was also stated that if the assessee had
not agreed to settle the issue the client would have stopped
-: 13 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore business and would have also created litigation which
would have cost the assessee with additional expense, time
and energy. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee contended
that the CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance by holding that
the transaction cannot be held to be revenue in nature.
The Ld. Counsel for the assessee further contended that
the loss borne by the assessee of Rs. 3,78,440/- was in the
nature of a business loss. The assessee has squared off the
trades of the client in which the client suffered losses. The
assessee settled the account with the client and agreed to
bear the losses to the extent of Rs. 3,78,440/-. After
settlement, the client resumed its transactions with the
assessee and the assessee earned substantial income from
the said client. Therefore, the business and commercial
expediency of making the settlement with the client and
agreeing to bear the loss to the extent of Rs. 3,78,440/- is
very well established on records. The Ld. Counsel for the
-: 14 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore assessee contended that the disallowance made by the AO
by treating the said loss as speculation loss and confirmed
by the CIT(A) is not justified. The same may please be
deleted.
The Ld. Departmental Representative supported the 9.
orders of the lower authorities.
We have carefully considered the facts, rival
submissions and have perused the material available on
record. We have also perused the orders of the lower
authorities. We find that the assessee is a share broker
registered with BSE and NSE. The assessee has incurred
Rs. 3,78,440/- on account of settlement with one of its
clients, Mr. Jagdish Jhawar. Mr. Jagdish Jhawar was
suffering losses and was not providing requisite margin to
the assessee. The assessee had to square off the existing
outstanding trades of the client in which the client suffered
losses. Since the assessee is in share business and looking
-: 15 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore to the future business prospects and in order to retain the
client agreed to bear the loss to the extent of Rs.
3,78,440/- and claimed the same as expenditure. We find
that the existing position of the client Mr. Jagdish Jhawar
was squared off in January 2004 and to settle the matter
and maintain trade relationship, the assessee had agreed
to bear the loss on which settlement was agreed upon in
March 2004 and the amount was claimed as
expenditure/loss. We also find that the trades with this
client were resumed from 15.03.2004 and the assessee had
earned brokerage from the said client immediately in the
next year amounting to Rs. 3,29,492/- in respect of F&O
trade and brokerage at Rs. 1,40,870/- in respect of share
trading. We find that due to the said relationship only the
assessee was able to make good the loss suffered due to
settlement with the client. We find that the ld. CIT(A)
confirmed the disallowance by holding that the transaction
-: 16 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore cannot be held to be revenue in nature. We, therefore, hold that the loss borne by the assessee of Rs. 3,78,440/- is in the nature of a business loss. We find that the business and commercial expediency of making the settlement with the client and agreeing to bear the loss to the extent of Rs. 3,78,440/- is very well established on records. We, therefore, delete the addition of Rs. 3,78,440/-. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly 11. allowed. The order pronounced in the open court on 29.06.2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (मनीष बोरड) (कुल भारत) लेखा सद�य �या�यक सद�य (KUL BHARAT) (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Indore; �दनांक Dated : 29/06/2018 CPU*/SPS Copy to: Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ITAT (DR)/Guard file.
-: 17 :- Arihant Fincap Ltd., Indore By order Private Secretary/DDO, Indore