CIT v. Bank of India

218 ITR 371High Court2015#4585 most cited

What is CIT v. Bank of India authority for?

Expenses arising from foreign exchange fluctuations on revenue expenditure and foreign currency loans for day-to-day business operations are notional or anticipated losses and are allowable.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bank of India · 218 ITR 371 · foreign exchange fluctuation · revenue expenditure · foreign currency loan · notional loss · allowable deduction · Section 41 · Section 36

Also reported as

64 Taxmann.com 215

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 244ASection 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 40A(9)Section 41(4)

Issues it is cited on

depreciation on leased assetssection 43dsection 36(2)(v)section 41(4)section 36(2)section 36(1)(viia)section 36(1)(iv)right to receivesection 41section 36(1)(vii)icdsmercantile system of accounting

Judgments citing CIT v. Bank of India

ASST CIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3882/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI JAGADISH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3680/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 State Bank of India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Financial Reporting & Taxation Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Dept. Mumbai 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 [PAN: AAACS8577K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3882/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. State Bank of India of Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Financial Reporting & Taxation Mumbai Dept. 3rd Floor, Corpor…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee as well as revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3680/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Jagadish ()

Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SMT. BEENA PILLAI (JUDICIAL MEMBER) & SHRI JAGADISH (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) I.T.A. No. 3680/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 State Bank of India Vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Financial Reporting & Taxation Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Dept. Mumbai 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai - 400021 [PAN: AAACS8577K] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A. No. 3882/Mum/2017 Assessment Year: 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. State Bank of India of Income-tax, Circle-2(2)(1), Financial Reporting & Taxation Mumbai Dept. 3rd Floor, Corpor…

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…` IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL , JM A.Y.2006-07 [ by Assessee] & ITA No. 4952/MUM /2013 [By AO ] ITA No 4128/MUM /2014 A.Y.2007-08 [ By AO] & [By Assessee] Vs. State Bank of India The Additional 3rd Floor, Commissionerof Income tax Corporate Centre Circle 2 (2) Mumbai Madam Cama Road Room No 545, Aykar Bhavan Nariman Point Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai 400021 Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN AAACS8577K Assessee by Shri Ketan Ved &Abdulkadir Jawad Wala Revenue by Shri P C Chhhotaray Special Counsel Shri Dr Kishor Dhule…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…Page | 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL , JM ITA No. 3868/MUM/2013 [ by Assessee] & ITA No . 4952/MUM /2013 [By AO ] Vs. ITA No 4128/MUM /2014 [ By AO] & ITA no 4105/MUM/2014 [By Assessee] A.Y .2006-07 A.Y .2007-08 State Bank of India 3 r d Floor, Corporate Centre Madam Cama Road Nariman Point Mumbai 400021 The Add it ional Commissionerof Income tax Circle 2 (2) Mumbai Room No 545 , Aykar Bhavan Maharishi Karve Road Mumbai 400020 (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN AAACS8577K Assessee by Shri Ketan Ved &Abdulka…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, MUMBAI

ITA 1533/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved &For Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JM ITA No. 1533/Mum/2023 (Assessment Year: 2019-20) State Bank of India Financial Reporting & Taxation, 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Appellant) Vs. PCIT Room No.344, Aaykar Bhavan Mumbai-400 020 (Respondent) PAN No. AAACS8577K Assessee by : Shri Ketan Ved & Shri Abdulkadir Jawadwala, ARs Revenue by : Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule, CIT DR Date of hearing: 30-05-2024 Date of pronouncement : 28-08-2024 ORDER PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM: 01. ITA No. 1533/M…

ADDL. CIT-(08), NEW DELHI vs. SOPRA INDIA PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue thus is dismissed

ITA 1175/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2023AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 145

…rd foreign exchange contract. vi) The issue is squarely covered by the following decisions:- a) Indian Overseas Bank Ltd., 246 ITR 206(Mad) b) Indian Overseas Bank Ltd., 151 ITR 446 (Mad) c) Kamani Metals & Alloys Ltd., 208 ITR 1017 (Bom) d) Bank of India, 218 ITR 371 (Bom) e) Eveready Industries (1) Ltd., 78 ITD175 (Cal) 1) Indian Molasses Co. Ltd., 37 ITR 66 (SC) 5.2.7.2 The Special Bench thereafter, has discussed in detail the entire set of arguments put forth by the Revenue. In the concluding part of the judgment the special bench has held: "In view of the above discussion, we allow the assessee's appeal…

ASST CIT CIR 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4564/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3645/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) State Bank of India Finance Reporting & Taxation Department 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre ……………. Appellant Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai 400 021 PAN – AAACS8577K v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.4564/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai v/s State Bank of India Finance Reporting & Taxat…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3645/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: S/Shri P.J. Pardiwala a/w Ninad PatadeFor Respondent: Ms. Surabhi Sharma
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3645/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) State Bank of India Finance Reporting & Taxation Department 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre ……………. Appellant Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point Mumbai 400 021 PAN – AAACS8577K v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai ITA no.4564/Mum./2016 (Assessment Year : 2009–10) Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Appellant Circle–2(2)(1), Mumbai v/s State Bank of India Finance Reporting & Taxat…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed, as indicated above

ITA 3644/MUM/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank Of India The Dy. Commissioner Of 3Rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacs8577K

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &For Respondent: Shri Anadi Varma, CIT-DR&
Section 143(3)Section 147

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, उपाध्यक्ष एविं श्री जी. मिंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 3644/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2008-09) State Bank of India The Dy. Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Corporate Centre Income Tax, Circle -2(2)(1) बनाम/ Madam Cama Road Mumbai Vs. Nariman Point Mumbai-400021 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./PAN No. AAACS8577K आयकर अपील सुं./ ITA No. 4563/Mum/2016 (ननर्ाारण वर्ा / Assessmen…

DCIT CIR - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1416/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…urred for various type of revenue expenditure as well as for loan in foreign currency taken for day to day functioning of business. The AO wrongly treated as notional or anticipated loss. However, the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of CIT vs. Bank of India 218 ITR 371 and CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. deleted the disallowance. Ld. AR for assessee further argued that this issue (ground) is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of CIT vs. Woodward Governor (I). Pvt. Ltd. 312 ITR 254, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation vs. CIT 322 ITR 18 (SC) and DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (2010) 41 SOT 290 (Mum)…

M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG. 3(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 7092/MUM/2005[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K. Pradhan

…urred for various type of revenue expenditure as well as for loan in foreign currency taken for day to day functioning of business. The AO wrongly treated as notional or anticipated loss. However, the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of CIT vs. Bank of India 218 ITR 371 and CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. deleted the disallowance. Ld. AR for assessee further argued that this issue (ground) is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of CIT vs. Woodward Governor (I). Pvt. Ltd. 312 ITR 254, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation vs. CIT 322 ITR 18 (SC) and DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (2010) 41 SOT 290 (Mum)…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 317/CHNY/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 316/CHNY/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 205/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 204/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. M/S. TURBO ENERGEY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 203/CHNY/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. TURBO ENERGY LIMITED, CHENNAI

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

ITA 629/CHNY/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

TURBO ENERGY LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

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

ITA 351/CHNY/2013[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 May 2017AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri D.S.Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.351/Mds/2013 & Ita Nos.316 & 317/Mds/2014 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2007-08 & Ays 2008-09 & 2009-10

Section 10BSection 10B(8)Section 80I

…ch is incidental to trading operations is allowable as deduction. In the instant case the loss has arisen in the course of appellants trading operation only. This view is also supported by the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs Bank of India (218 ITR 371). Further the decision of Apex Court in CIT v Woodward Governor India P. Limited (312 ITR 254) also fortifies the case of the appellant. The Honorable Court in that case had observed as under: “Loss1’ suffered by the assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the Balance sheet date is an item of expenditure under sec…

ITO 16(2)(4), MUMBAI vs. SURYA GEMS, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 292/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer-16(2)(4), M/S Surya Gems, बनाम/ 02Nd Floor, Matru Mandir, Flat No.4, 02Nd Floor, Tardeo Road, Bhaveshwar Sgar Patel Vs. Mumbai-400007 Compound 20 Napean Sea Road, Mumbai-400020 (याजस्व /Revenue) (यनधाारयती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aakfs6513Q याजस्व की ओर से / Revenue By Shri B.S. Bist-Dr यनधाारयती की ओर से / Assessee By None ुनवाई की तायीख / Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2017 आदेश की तायीख /Date Of Order: 08/03/2017

…med the same. Ld CIT D.R. submitted that the reference to the Special Bench has been made because the decision of ITAT in the case of Deutsche Bank A.G., 86 ITD 431(supra) and that of the decision of the Hon‘ble Bombay High Court in the case of Bank of India, 218 ITR 371 relied upon by the assessee proceeded on the footing that the securities were stock-in-trade but as far as the forward contract is concerned, the same is not stock-in-trade and, therefore, those decisions are not applicable. He pointed out that there is no material to prove that forward contract to buy or sell foreign currency itself constitutes…

DCIT RG. - 3(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. GUJARAT AMBUJA CEMENTS LTD., MUMBAI

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

ITA 4374/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla

…urred for various type of revenue expenditure as well as for loan in foreign currency taken for day to day functioning of business. The AO wrongly treated as notional or anticipated loss. However, the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of CIT vs. Bank of India 218 ITR 371 and CIT vs. V.S. Dempo & Co. deleted the disallowance. Ld. AR for assessee further argued that this issue (ground) is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of CIT vs. Woodward Governor (I). Pvt. Ltd. 312 ITR 254, Oil and Natural Gas Corporation vs. CIT 322 ITR 18 (SC) and DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (2010) 41 SOT 290 (Mum)…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

CIT v. Bank of India (218 ITR 371) — Cited in 26 Judgments | BharatTax