AMOL CAPITAL MARKETS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO 4(1)(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that losses from F&O transactions are not speculative losses under Section 43(5)(d) of the IT Act. Therefore, such losses can be set off against business income.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a return declaring nil income. The AO treated brought forward loss from F&O transactions as speculative and disallowed set off against business income. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether losses from F&O transactions are speculative and can be set off against business income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Snowtex Investment Limited v. PCIT16 citing105 Taxmann.com 282 · 2019 · SC · Read judgment
- Asian Financial Services Ltd. v. CIT15 citing70 Taxmann.com 9 · 2016 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI ABY T VARKEY & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH
Per Amarjit Singh (AM): The solitary ground of appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of ld. CIT(A) in confirming the action of assessing officer of denying set off of profit of F. & O. transactions and profit of non-delivery based share against brought forward business loss.
Fact in brief is that return of income declaring income at Rs.nil was filed on 25.09.2014. The assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 15.12.2016. The assessing officer has treated the brought forward loss on the trading of F & O as speculative loss by invoking explanation to Sec. 73 of the Act and has not allowed the same to be set
P a g e | 2 ITA No. 783/Mum/2019 dated 17.10.2019 has dismissed the appeal of the assessee after referring the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Snowtex Investment Ld. Vs. CIT (105 taxman.com 282) dated 30.04.2019. Subsequently, the assesse has filed miscellaneous application against the above referred decision of ITAT and the ITAT vide M.A. No. 269/Mum/2022 dated 26.06.2023 recalled the above referred order of the ITAT dated 30.04.2019 holding that decision Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Snowtex Investment Ltd. (supra) does not apply to the case of the assessee as the said case was pertained to assessment year 2008-09 whereas the case of the assessee is pertained to assessment year 2014-15. The ITAT bench in the miscellaneous application order has also held that assesse did not have any speculative business or loss because assessee was in the business of trading in future and option in shares on the recognised stock exchange which was out of the speculative business definition in view of the provision of Sec. 43 sub-section (5)(d).
Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. Without reiterating the facts as discussed above we have perused the provision of Sec. 43(5) of the Act as per which loss in F & O transaction is not speculative loss. In this regard, we have also perused the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Asian Financial Services Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Calcutta (2016) 70 taxman.com 9 (Calcutta) wherein held that loss incurred on account of derivatives would be deemed business loss under proviso to Sec.43(5) and not P a g e | 3 As such loss would be set off against income from business. We have also perused decision of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of M/s Sucom India Ld. Vs. JCIT vide ITA No. 6203/Del/2015 dated 05.10.2018 wherein after following the decision of Hon’ble Calcutta High Court as referred above held that loss suffered by assessee of derivative transaction is not speculative loss and same is eligible to be adjusted against the business income and explanation 73 of the IT Act is not attracted. Following the aforesaid decision we restore this issue to the file of the assessing officer for allowing the claim of set off after examination/verification that assessee has incurred loss from F & O transactions. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18.08.2023 (Aby T Varkey) (Amarjit Singh) Judicial Member Accountant Member Place: Mumbai Date 18.08.2023 Rohit: PS
P a g e | 4 आदेश की प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी / The Respondent. आयकर आयुक्त / CIT 3. 4. विभागीय प्रविविवि, आयकर अपीलीय अविकरण DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ड फाईल / Guard file.
सत्यावपि प्रवि //// आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,
उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.
More judgments on Section 73
- The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Nk Proteins Pvt. LtdTAXAP/449/20254 Aug 2026
- Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited…ITA 7971/MUM/2025[2014]Status: Disposed7 Jul 2026
- Trinity Opportunity Fund I, Mauritius vs Assessing Officer-Int Tax Circle 4(1)(2)…ITA 3140/MUM/2026[2023-24]Status: Disposed15 Jun 2026AY 2023-24
- ITO, Parel, Mumbai vs Kunal Govind Kataria, MumbaiITA 2125/MUM/2026[2010-11]Status: Disposed22 May 2026AY 2010-11
- Kpa Apparels Private Limited, Delhi vs Income Tax Officer Ward 14(3), DelhiITA 2798/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed14 May 2026AY 2020-21
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Modern Engineers And Contractors vs. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner (St)Andhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026