DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) - 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. CITIBANK OVERSEAS INVESTMENT CORPORATION, MUMBAI

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): - 1. Aforesaid appeal by revenue for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2013-14 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-56, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)—56 DCIT(IT)-2(1)(1)/2016-17/341-C dated 23/11/2017 on following grounds of appeal: -

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) was right in holding that foreign exchange gain on underlying Forward Foreign Exchange Contracts is not taxable under the head Income from Other sources, when Forward Foreign Exchange Contract is neither a Capital Asset nor it is the business of the assessee to enter into such contracts?

3. The Appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer restored.

The assessee, upon receipt of notice of hearing, has filed cross-objections against the same. However, Ld. Sr. Counsel, Shri P.J. Pardiwala, submitted that upon instructions, the assessee is not interested in pursuing the same for this year. Therefore, the cross-objection stand dismissed in limine. 2. So far as the revenue’s appeal is concerned, it is admitted position that the issue is squarely covered by series of Tribunal’s decisions in M/s Citibank Overseas Investment Corporation Assessment Year-2013-14 assessee’s own case for AYs 2001-02, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011- 12, the copies of which has been placed on record. The Ld. CIT-DR is unable to controvert the fact that said rulings are squarely applicable to the facts of this year also. In fact, Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the additions by relying upon its own decision in assessee’s own case for AY 2012-13 order dated 18/10/2017 wherein the aforesaid decisions of the Tribunal have been followed.

M/s Citibank Overseas Investment Corporation Assessment Year-2013-14 5. Since the impugned decision only follows the orders of Tribunal for other years, no fault could be found in the same. Nothing on record establishes that there is any change in the factual matrix.