SMT RASHMI RAMESH DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 17(1), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT held that commodity derivative transactions on NSEL, backed by delivery of commodities, are not speculative. The bad debt arising from these transactions is allowable as a business loss.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed business loss from commodity derivative transactions on NSEL. The Assessing Officer treated these as speculative transactions and disallowed the loss. The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal.
What were the issues?
Whether commodity derivative transactions on NSEL are speculative, and if bad debts arising from them are allowable business losses.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)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.
- TRF Ltd. v. CIT714 citing323 ITR 397 · 2010 · SC
- TRF Ltd. v. CIT12 citing320 ITR 397
- ITO v. Fairdeal Infin Services Private Limited3 citing173 Taxmann.com 517 · 2025
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
[ Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
The present appeal preferred by the Assessee is directed against the order, dated 27/05/2021, passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘the CIT(A)’] whereby the Ld. CIT(A) had partly allowed the appeal against the Assessment Order, dated 30/12/2016, passed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] for the Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2. The Assessee has raised following grounds 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 →- A.Merchy Clara vs. The Commissioner Of GST And Central Excise (Appeals)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- Nallathambi Thangaraj vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IMadras · 13 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S. Hira Films PVT. LTD. vs. M/S. Prasad Film Labs (Mumbai) Private LimitedBombay · 13 Oct 2026
- M/S Jung Bahadur Singh, Through Its Proprietor, Jang Bahadur Singh vs. The Union Of INDIA, Through Its Secretary, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of RevenueJharkhand · 13 Oct 2026