Section 24(1) — the law in short
What the courts have decided on section 24(1), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Davenport & Co P Ltd v CIT
Supreme CourtHelps department
I bought and sold goods by endorsing delivery orders and never handled them. Is my loss a speculation loss even though the sale was perfectly valid?
Yes. The Supreme Court held that actual delivery in the definition of a speculative transaction means real as opposed to notional delivery. The wider meaning of delivery in the Sale of Goods Act, which takes in constructive or symbolic delivery, has no bearing on it. A transaction that is speculative in the ordinary sense is not caught if the commodity is actually delivered, and a transaction that is not speculative in any ordinary sense is caught if it is not. The definition does not invalidate anything; it only brands such transactions as speculative for income-tax purposes and confines the loss accordingly.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.
