How many judgments cite CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd.?

114 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. (261 ITR 256), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 43(5), Section 143(3), Section 10A, Section 234B, Section 234C, Section 250.

CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd.

261 ITR 256High Court2003#932 most cited

What is CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. authority for?

Losses incurred from foreign exchange forward contracts or derivatives, entered into to hedge currency fluctuations in the course of regular business like exports, are treated as business losses and not as speculative transactions under Section 43(5). Such contracts, when incidental to business and cover exchange rate risks, constitute a business activity.

114

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. · Section 43(5) · speculative transaction · foreign exchange loss · forex forward contract · hedging transactions · business loss · export business · currency fluctuation loss · non-speculative activity

Also reported as

134 Taxmann 376

Sections most often in play

Section 43(5)Section 143(3)Section 10A Section 234B Section 234C Section 250 Section 37(1)Section 115JB

Issues it is cited on

stpi unit test of enduring benefit section 203 speculative transaction convertible foreign exchange software technology park section 43(5)section 10(2)speculation loss section 39 scheme of arrangement demerger

Judgments citing CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd.

M/S. Metro Exporters Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. The ACIT RG 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 2026/MUM/2008[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jun 2016AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Respondent: Shri Abhinay Kumbhar (DR)

Section 147Section 14ASection 28Section 3Section 37(1)Section 80H

…ion of exchange rate gain on forward contract entered into by the assessee, for the purpose of computation under Section 80HHC, to the file of the AO with a direction to follow the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of CIT V/so Badridas Gauridu (P) Limited (261 ITR 256) ? b) Whether; on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of CIT (A) in favour of the assessee company, the issue of exclusion of foreign exchange gain in respect of export profit from the export turnover for the purpose of computation under Section 80HHC of the Act ?" 2. In so far questio…

ACIT 10(2), Mumbai vs. Foods & Inns Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6271/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Foods & Inns Ltd. Acit, Circle 10(2) Punjabwadi, Sion Trombay Room No. 432, 4Th Floor Vs. Road, Deonar Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Mumbai 400088 Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacf0521C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Keshav B. BhujleFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss

Section 14ASection 40

…retch of imagination can they be classified as ‘speculative business’. 5.3.4 We find that the issue on hand is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. (2003) 261 ITR 256 (Bom): “The assessee had entered into forward contracts with the Banks in respect of foreign exchange. Some of these contracts could not be honoured by the assessee for which it had to pay some amount which was debited to the P & L account. The assessee claimed the same as business loss being payment on account of cancellation of forward booking…

ACIT 10(2), Mumbai vs. Foods & Inns Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 6629/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Keshav B. BhujleFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss

Section 14ASection 40

Foods and Inns Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 10(2), Mumbai

ITA 1262/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Keshav B. BhujleFor Respondent: Shri G.M. Doss

Section 14ASection 40

Subex Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 373/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhury

For Appellant: Shri Raghunathan S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-II(DR)

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 35D

…dward Governor (P) Ltd. (supra) and held that loss claimed by the assessee on account of fluctuation in rate of foreign exchange as on date of balance-sheet was allowable as an expenditure under section 37(1). In the case of Badridas Gauridu (P.) Ltd. v. CIT, 261 ITR 256 (Bom), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court held that hedging contracts were incidental to assessee’s business of export of cotton, and therefore losses represented a business loss to the assessee. Following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ONGC (supra) and by the Hon’ble Bombay High court in the case of Badridas Gaur…

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Vishinda Diamonds, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for assessment year 2009-10 is dismissed

ITA 7330/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainthe Acit-16(3), Matru Mandir, 2Nd Floor, R.No.206,Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400007 ... Appellant Vs.

For Appellant: Shri Sumit KumarFor Respondent: Shri Subhash S. Shetty

Section 143(3)

…eign exchange. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue are thus dismissed. 11. The learned D.R. for the Revenue had placed reliance on M/s. Vinod Kumar Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. (supra). The said decision is contrary to the view taken in Badridas Gauridu P. Ltd. 261 ITR 256 (Bom). We find no merit in the said reliance. Allowing the claim of the assessee, we dismiss the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue. 12. The issue in ITA No. 7329/Mum/2013 is identical to the issue in ITA No. 7328/Mum/2013 and our decision in ITA No. 7328/Mum/2013 applies mutatis mutants to the issue in ITA No. 7329/Mum/2013.” 7.2 Following…

Hiraco India P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2300/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. N.2300/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2009-10) बनाम/ M/S Hiraco India Pvt.Ltd, Dy.Commissioner Of Income Gw 2050, Tax-5(1), Vs. Bharat Diamond Bourse, Aayakar Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, M K Road, Babdra (E), Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400051 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…urpose of section 10B or not,……..‖ 5.5.4 On the other hand, we find that the issue in question is squarely covered in favour of the assessee from the following judgments of Hon‘ble Bombay and Gujarat High Courts: (i) CIT Vs. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd – (2003) 261 ITR 256 (Bom):…… (ii) CIT-III Vs. Panchmahal Steel Ltd (2013) 33 taxmann.com 10 (Guj)‖ Thus, the Bangalore bench of Tribunal has taken the view that the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench in the case of K. Mohan & Co. (Exports) (supra) shall not be applicable to the facts considered by it. Accordingly, by following the two decision of Hon‘ble Bom…

Janam Corporation P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 6489/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Janam Corporation P. Dcit 5(2), R.No.571, Ltd., 512-A, Pancharand 5Th Floor, Aayakar बनाम/ Marg, Opera House, Bhavan, M.K. Rd. Vs. Mumbai -400004 Mumbai (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aacj1263H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri Nitesh Joshi (Ar) राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar (Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…underlying transaction also becomes hedged and the corresponding loss/gain thereon gets treated as a business transaction. Reliance was placed on the 8 Janam Corporation judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd reported at 261 ITR 256, and the judgments of Mumbai ITAT in the case of Intergold reported at 27 SOT 239 and Voltas International 31 DTR 432 in this regard. Accordingly, the assessee’s plea was that the Ld. AO was incorrect in treating this as a speculative loss. But the Ld. CIT(A) did not accept the claim of the assessee and held these transactions to be speculative i…

M Suresh Company P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands partly allowed

ITA 3224/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Saktijit Deyआमकय अऩीर सं. / Ita No.3224/Mum./2012 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008–09) M/S. M. Suresh Company Pvt. Ltd. …….………. अऩीरधथी / 419, Parekh Market, Opera House Mumbai 400 004 Appellant Pan – Aaecm0931D V/S Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax ..…….………. प्रत्मथी / Range–5(2), Matru Mandir Respondent Mumbai 400 020 ननधधारयती की ओय से / Assessee By : Shri B.V. Jhaveri यधजस्व की ओय से / Revenue By : Shri Samir Tekriwal सुनवधई की तधयीख / आदेश घोषणध की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing – 07.10.2015 Date Of Order – 30.10.2015

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri Samir Tekriwal

Section 14ASection 43(5)Section 73

…his context, he referred to the order dated 25th May 2009 in ITA no.4821/Mum./2007, for the assessment year 2004–05. He submitted that the Tribunal, following the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT v/s Badridas Gauridu India Ltd., [2004] 261 ITR 256 (Bom.), has allowed assessee’s claim of loss on forward contract. In this context, he also referred to a number of other decisions of the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, including the order passed in ACIT v/s Mahindra Brothers, ITA no.1880/Mum./ 2005, dated 29th April 2009, which was confirmed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. 7. The learned Dep…

M/S. Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on transfer

ITA 882/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: S/Shri S.D. Kalipa, R.R.Maurya, Praveen SharmaFor Respondent: S/Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR, Subhakant Sahoo, Sr. DR

Section 119Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 92

…ITA No.882/D/2014 Asstt.Year: 2009-10 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH `I’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.882/Del/2014 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd., vs DCIT, 418, Naurang House, Circle-2(1), 21, K.G. Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. (PAN: AAACB0298A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: S/Shri S.D. Kalipa, R.R.Maurya, Praveen Sharma, Sanjay Kumar, Advocates Respondent by : S/Shri Ravi Jain, CIT DR, Subhakant Sahoo, Sr. DR Date of last hearing: 12.10.2015 Date of pronouncement: 14.10.2015 O R D E…

I.T.O WD - 2(3), Kolkata. vs. M/S Lgw Ltd., North 24 Parganas

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 267/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCA & Shri Amit Agarwal,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sachidananda Srivastava, CIT(DR)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH “B”, KOLKATA [Before Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri Waseem Ahmed, AM] Assessment Year : 2009-10 (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT) I.T.O., Ward-2 (3) -versus- M/s. LGW Limited Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AAACL 4670 N) C.O.No.29/Kol/2013 A/o ITA No.267/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/s. LGW Limited -versus- I.T.O., Ward-2(3), Kolkata Kolkata (PAN AAACL 4670 N)) (CROSS OBJECTOR) (RESPONDENT) For the Department : Shri Sachidananda Srivastava, CIT(DR) For the Assessee : Shri A.K.Tibrewal, FCA & Shri Amit Agarwal,Advocate Date of Hearing : 08.09.2015. Date of Pronouncement : 07.10.2…

Majestic Exports, Tiruppur vs. ACIT, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 3072/CHNY/2014[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2015AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1336 & 3072/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT

Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 8

…reign currency for purchase of plant and machinery with loan obtained in foreign currency is capital receipt and not speculative profit. 5.2 The ld. Authorised Representative for assessee relied on the judgment in the case of CIT vs. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd 261 ITR 256, (Mumbai) wherein it was held that The assessee was not a dealer in foreign exchange. The assessee was a cotton exporter. The assessee was an export house. Therefore, foreign exchange contracts were booked only as incidental to the assessee’s regular course of business. The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding to this effect in its order.…

Majestic Exports, Tiruppur vs. JCIT, Tiruppur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1336/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jul 2015AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.1336 & 3072/Mds/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2009-2010 & 2010-2011)

For Appellant: Shri. T. Banusekar, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri. Krishnamurthy, IRS, CIT

Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 8

Star Exports & Imports, Bangalore vs. Add.C.I.T., Bangalore

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 997/BANG/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Feb 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Abraham P George

For Appellant: Shri H.N.Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Dhivahar, JCIT

Section 43(5)

…e fluctuations and not a speculative in nature. Even if it was considered speculative in nature, it would not result in a speculative business. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Badridas Gauridu (P)Ltd 261 ITR 256 and that of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in CIT Vs Panchamahal Steel Ltd (Tax Appeal No.131 of 2013 dated 28-03-2013) and CIT Vs Friends & Friends Shipping Pvt.Ltd.(2013) 217 Taxmann 267. As per the learned AR all these decision follow the law laid down by the Hon’ble Mumbai High Court in the case of Sooraj Mull Nagarmull ( Supra) which was brus…