HYDERABAD YADGIRI TOLLWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT-1, AHMEDABAD

ITA 1332/AHD/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 October 2025AY 2018-19Bench: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member), SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer had not properly examined the claim for exchange loss. The claim was not in accordance with AS-11 and ICDS-VI, which require recognition of exchange differences in each previous year. Therefore, the PCIT's order was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction for exchange loss on repayment of a foreign currency loan. The PCIT invoked Section 263, holding that the Assessing Officer's assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue as the entire loss was claimed in one stretch, contrary to accounting standards and ICDS.

What were the issues?

Whether the PCIT correctly exercised revisionary powers under Section 263 when the Assessing Officer had not properly examined the allowability of exchange loss claimed in one go, contrary to accounting standards and ICDS.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 43A,Section 43AA,Section 143(3),Section 142(1),Section 145(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)Show 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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA

For Appellant: Shri Dhinal Shah, AR
For Respondent: Shri R. P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Hearing: 24.09.2025Pronounced: 30.10.2025

PER SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA, AM: This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmedabad-1 (in short “the PCIT”), dated 28.03.2025, passed in the capacity of his revisional juri iction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. There was a delay of 18 days in filing of this appeal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reason for delay. It is submitted that there was a

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.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

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 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →