NIRMAL KUMAR DUGAR , JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 130/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 October 2025AY 2016-2017Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the requirement of auditing account books was not applicable to the assessee as their turnover was less than the prescribed limit. Therefore, the claim of the assessee for setting off the business loss against other income deserved to be allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee declared 'Nil' income for AY 2016-17. The Assessing Officer made additions of Rs. 12,59,537/- (income from house property) and Rs. 1,04,155/- (income from other sources) by treating losses from share and derivative transactions (Rs. 18,39,385/-) as speculative. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the loss from share and derivative transactions can be treated as speculative and set off only against speculative income, or as a business loss deductible from other income, considering the turnover and audit requirements.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 43(5),Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 44AB,Section 44AD,Section 73

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC-Bench” JAIPUR

Before: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM

Hearing: 09/10/2025Pronounced: 13/10/2025
10.

As a result, the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by Learned CIT(A), though for different reasons, deserves to be set aside. Similarly, the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) also deserves to be set aside.

11.

Consequently, this appeal is allowed. File be consigned to the record room after the needful is done by the office. Order pronounced in the open court on 13/10/2025.

Sd/- Sd/- ¼xxu xks;y½ ¼ujsUnz dqekj½ (GAGAN GOYAL) (NARINDER KUMAR) ys[kk lnL; @Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 13/10/2025 *Santosh आदेश की प्रतिलिपिअग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. The Appellant- Nirmal Kumar Dugar, Jaipur 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- ITO, Ward 2(1), Jaipur 3. vk;djvk;qDr@ Theld CIT

More judgments on Section 43(5)

All 524 judgments and leading authorities on Section 43(5) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →