KETAN CERAMICS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. THE ACIT, CENTRAL-CIRCLE-2(3), NAGPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal found that there was a need for more information regarding the settlement of transactions, the use of funds, and the applicability of Section 43(5). Therefore, the matter was remanded to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee company claimed finance charges of Rs. 83,52,521/-. The Assessing Officer disallowed a portion of this, treating it as bogus expenditure related to non-delivery based coal trading. The CIT(A) confirmed this, classifying the transactions as speculative under Section 43(5) and allowing only a small portion of the finance charges.
What were the issues?
Whether non-delivery based trading transactions constitute speculative transactions under Section 43(5) and whether financial expenses incurred for such transactions are allowable.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 16, Mumbai [holding concurrent juri iction of CIT(A)–1, Nagpur] dated 05.08.2013 for the Assessment Year 2010-11. 2
The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :– “(1) That the order of the Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 2(3), Nagpur is bad in law and wrong on facts and the learned C.I.T.(A) has erred in confirming the same. On the facts and circumstances of the case action of
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 43(5)
- Kamal Ramprasad Gupta, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle…ITA 3458/MUM/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2016-17
- The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Nk Proteins Pvt. LtdTAXAP/449/20254 Aug 2026
- Income Tax Officer, Ward-41(3)(1), Mumbai vs Ajit H Loladiya HUF, MumbaiITA 987/MUM/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed10 Jul 2026AY 2012-13
- Raag Vihar Apartments Private Limited… vs DCIT Circle 16(1), C. R. Building, DelhiITA 8774/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: Disposed10 Jul 2026AY 2015-16
- Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai vs Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited…ITA 7971/MUM/2025[2014]Status: Disposed7 Jul 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026