DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait

41 SOT 290Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2010#1414 most cited

What is DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait authority for?

Mark-to-Market (MTM) losses on forward contracts and forex derivatives are allowable as a revenue deduction under Section 37(1) where a binding obligation is created against the assessee. This is provided the assessee consistently follows the same accounting method for both profits and losses.

81

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

DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait · Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait 41 SOT 290 · MTM losses allowability · forward contracts loss deduction · forex derivatives section 37(1) · foreign exchange fluctuation · consistent accounting method · ITAT Special Bench Mumbai · Section 145(2)

Also reported as

132 TTJ 505

Sections most often in play

Section 145(2)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

free trade zonestpi unitsection 80ia(8)section 28(i)foreign tax creditsection 92ca(1)section 10aacomputer softwaresection 10abook profitssection 30section 40(a)(i)

Judgments citing DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait

Steria (India) Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 8, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 5745/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ther the loss Page 34 of 95 has occurred in the course of carrying on the business or is incidental to it;…..” (ix) kind attention, in this regard, is further invited to the decision of Special Bench of Tribunal in case of DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait: 41 SOT 290, where after relying on the decision of CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd.: 312 ITR 254 (SC), it was held that loss arising on un-matured derivative contracts, on mark to market basis, is allowable deduction, in accordance with the mercantile system of accounting, and could not be said to be contingent/notional loss. (x) It has been held lik…

M/S Steria Ndia Ltd., Noida vs. Addl CIT, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 741/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ther the loss Page 34 of 95 has occurred in the course of carrying on the business or is incidental to it;…..” (ix) kind attention, in this regard, is further invited to the decision of Special Bench of Tribunal in case of DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait: 41 SOT 290, where after relying on the decision of CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd.: 312 ITR 254 (SC), it was held that loss arising on un-matured derivative contracts, on mark to market basis, is allowable deduction, in accordance with the mercantile system of accounting, and could not be said to be contingent/notional loss. (x) It has been held lik…

Steria India Ltd., Noida vs. Addl.CIT, Speciaql Range-8, New Delhi

In the result ITA number 5745/del/2018 for assessment year 2014 – 15

ITA 3992/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Anupam Kant Garg, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

…ther the loss Page 34 of 95 has occurred in the course of carrying on the business or is incidental to it;…..” (ix) kind attention, in this regard, is further invited to the decision of Special Bench of Tribunal in case of DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait: 41 SOT 290, where after relying on the decision of CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd.: 312 ITR 254 (SC), it was held that loss arising on un-matured derivative contracts, on mark to market basis, is allowable deduction, in accordance with the mercantile system of accounting, and could not be said to be contingent/notional loss. (x) It has been held lik…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Asahi India Glass Ltd., New Delhi

Accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2501/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Shashi Kajle, Senior DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 43A

…disallowed the gross MTM loss of Rs.16,70,000/- by relying upon Instruction No.3/2010 dated 23.03.2010 by treating MTM loss as a notional loss being contingent in nature. 31. Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait 132 TTJ 505 decided the identical issue by returning following findings :- “56. The controversy stands now resolved in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd., 116 ITR 1 (SC), wherein, it has been held that fluctuation on account of foreign exchange rate is an allowable deduction and is not capital in nature. The o…

M/S. Asahi India Glass Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the ground no. 1 raised by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1638/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 May 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Shashi Kajle, Senior DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 43A

…disallowed the gross MTM loss of Rs.16,70,000/- by relying upon Instruction No.3/2010 dated 23.03.2010 by treating MTM loss as a notional loss being contingent in nature. 31. Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait 132 TTJ 505 decided the identical issue by returning following findings :- “56. The controversy stands now resolved in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd., 116 ITR 1 (SC), wherein, it has been held that fluctuation on account of foreign exchange rate is an allowable deduction and is not capital in nature. The o…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 219/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

…he same does not constitute notional/contingent loss. 4. As regards the reference made by the Ld. AO to Instruction No. 3/2010, I find that the said Circular was considered by the Special Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (41 SOT 290) and ITAT, Delhi the case of Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Add!. CIT (32 Taxmann.com 123) as also the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (supra) was considered by the ITAT. Having considered both, the Tribunal held that the view canvassed by the CBOT in its Instruction No.3/2010 was contrary to the rati…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 218/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

…he same does not constitute notional/contingent loss. 4. As regards the reference made by the Ld. AO to Instruction No. 3/2010, I find that the said Circular was considered by the Special Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (41 SOT 290) and ITAT, Delhi the case of Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Add!. CIT (32 Taxmann.com 123) as also the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (supra) was considered by the ITAT. Having considered both, the Tribunal held that the view canvassed by the CBOT in its Instruction No.3/2010 was contrary to the rati…

DCIT, Central Circle - 2(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 217/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini

Section 143(3)Section 144C(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 43B

…he same does not constitute notional/contingent loss. 4. As regards the reference made by the Ld. AO to Instruction No. 3/2010, I find that the said Circular was considered by the Special Bench of ITAT, Mumbai in the case of DCIT Vs. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (41 SOT 290) and ITAT, Delhi the case of Bechtel India Pvt. Ltd Vs. Add!. CIT (32 Taxmann.com 123) as also the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs Woodward Governor India P. Ltd (supra) was considered by the ITAT. Having considered both, the Tribunal held that the view canvassed by the CBOT in its Instruction No.3/2010 was contrary to the rati…

The Hongkong & Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ADIT (It) RG-3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3996/MUM/2009[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Nov 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Adit (It) 3(1) Vs. The Hongkong & Scindia House, Shanghai Banking R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd N.M.Road, 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi Mumbai – 38 Road Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & The Hongkong & Vs. Adit (It) 3(1) Shanghai Banking Scindia House, R.No.132, 1St Floor Corporation Ltd 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi N.M.Road, Road Mumbai – 38 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaact2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 192Section 37Section 44C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & ADIT (IT) 3(1) Vs. The Hongkong and Scindia House, Shanghai Banking R.No.132, 1st Floor Corporation Ltd N.M.Road, 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi Mumbai – 38 Road Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No. AAACT2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & The Hongkong and Vs. ADIT (IT) 3(1) Shanghai Banking Scindia House, R.No.132, 1st Floor Corporation Ltd 52/60, Mahatma Gandhi N.M.Road, Road Mumbai – 38 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN/GIR No. AAACT2786P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue by Shri Anand Mohan Assessee by Shri Porus Kaka and Shri…

DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Mcleod Russel India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 115/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…l Gas Corpn. Limited Vs CIT (322 ITR 180). 10.5 The A/R’s reliance on the decisions of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Bechtel India PVT. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (32 Taxmann.com 123) and ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench in the case of DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait (41 SOT 290) also found to be relevant. In arriving at the finding that MTM losses were definitive and not notional or contingent, the ITAT Benches had taken into account not only the decisions of the Apex Court referred above but also the CBDT Instruction No. 3 of 2010 on which the AO placed reliance in the impugned order. Even after considering Instruction…

DCIT, Cir-4(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Mcleod Russel India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 114/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 143(3)Section 43B

…l Gas Corpn. Limited Vs CIT (322 ITR 180). 10.5 The A/R’s reliance on the decisions of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Bechtel India PVT. Ltd. Vs. Addl. CIT (32 Taxmann.com 123) and ITAT, Mumbai Special Bench in the case of DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait (41 SOT 290) also found to be relevant. In arriving at the finding that MTM losses were definitive and not notional or contingent, the ITAT Benches had taken into account not only the decisions of the Apex Court referred above but also the CBDT Instruction No. 3 of 2010 on which the AO placed reliance in the impugned order. Even after considering Instruction…

DCIT 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7241/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P.) Ltd. (312 ITR 254) (SC), PCIT v. M/s Bhargovi (ITA No. 1022 of 2015) (Bom), CIT v. D. Chetan & Co. (390 ITR 36) (Bom), DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (41 SOT 290) (Mum) (SB). Mangalore Refinery On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 31. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. We are of the considered view that the decisions cited by the Ld. counsel need to be examined by the AO on the basis of relevant facts. Therefore, we set…

Magnalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 3(2)

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7133/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Mangalore Refinery & Addl. Cit-3(2), Mumbai Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Respondent Appellant Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit-3(2) Room No. Mangalore Refinery & 674, 6Th Floor, Petrochemicals Ltd. 15Th Vs. Aayakarbhavan, M. K. Floor, Maker Tower, Ewing, Road, Mumbai-400020. Cuffe Parade, Mumbai- 400005. Pan No. Aaacm5132A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior Advocate & Mr. Madhur Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Mr.Samuel Darse, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 07/09/2018

For Appellant: Mr. J.D.J. Mistri, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.Samuel Darse, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 44B

…. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in CIT v. Woodward Governor India (P.) Ltd. (312 ITR 254) (SC), PCIT v. M/s Bhargovi (ITA No. 1022 of 2015) (Bom), CIT v. D. Chetan & Co. (390 ITR 36) (Bom), DCIT v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait (41 SOT 290) (Mum) (SB). Mangalore Refinery On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 31. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. We are of the considered view that the decisions cited by the Ld. counsel need to be examined by the AO on the basis of relevant facts. Therefore, we set…

Asst CIT 19(1), Mumbai vs. Dharamchand Paraschand Exports, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6743/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Dharamchand Paraschand Income Tax- 19(1) Exports, Room No.203, 2Nd Floor Ce/3011-3012, Bharat Matru Mandir, Tardeo Road Diamond Bourse, Bkc Mumbai – 400 007 Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan/Gir No. Aaafd1078M Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)

…y accepted accounting standards; (vi) whether the system adopted by assessee is fair and reasonable or is adopted only with a view to reducing the incidence of taxation." 6.3.6 In the case of Dy. CTT (International Taxation) v. Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait [2010] 41 SOT 290 , Hon'ble Special Bench of Mumbai Tribunal held that losses incurred by the appellant on account of revaluation of the contract on the last date of the relevant accounting period based on the RBI guidelines/applicable accounting standard is allowable as deduction. It held that such loss is neither notional nor contingent liability in which the mom…

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

…see 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) (SB). In case of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(supra) the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held as under: “Loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of balance sheet in respect of loans taken for revenue purposes is allowable as expenditure u/s.37(1), notwithstanding the fact that liability has not been discharged…

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

…see 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) (SB). In case of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(supra) the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held as under: “Loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of balance sheet in respect of loans taken for revenue purposes is allowable as expenditure u/s.37(1), notwithstanding the fact that liability has not been discharged…

Addl DIT (It) RG-1, Mumbai vs. Dbs Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 6865/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri N.K Pradhan

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgarwalFor Respondent: Shri Samuel Darse
Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40

…enged the disallowance before the first appellate authority. 9. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the submissions of the assessee and following the decision of the Tribunal 8 DBS Bank Limited in the case of Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait BSC, 132 TTJ 505 as well as the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment year 1998–99 allowed the claim. 10. We have heard the learned Counsels appearing for both the parties. It has been agreed before us that the disputed issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal in assessment year 1998–99 and 2003–04 to 2006–07. On…

Asst CIT 16(3), Mumbai vs. Shree Balkrishna Exports, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and both the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4185/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 43(5)(c)

…he learned CIT(A) has taken support of the following decisions in order to hold that the above said claim of the assessee cannot be considered as a Notional loss:- a) Woodward Governnor India P. Ltd. (312 ITR 254) b) DCIT Vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait (2010) 41 SOT 290 c) Bharat Earth Movers Vs. CIT (245 ITR 428) d) ONGC Vs. CIT (322 ITR 180) 8. The Ld D.R relied upon the decision rendered by the co-ordinate bench in the case of S. Vinodkumar Diamonds Pvt. Ltd (supra). However, as pointed out by Ld D.R, the above said decision cannot be taken support of in view of the observations made by Hon’ble Bombay High Co…

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

…see 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) (SB). In case of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(supra) the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held as under: 29 and 4374/Mum/2005 “Loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of balance sheet in respect of loans taken for revenue purposes is allowable as expenditure u/s.37(1), notwithstanding the fact that liability h…

M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT RG. 3(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3360/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

…see 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) (SB). In case of Oil and Natural Gas Corporation(supra) the Hon‟ble Apex Court has held as under: 29 and 4374/Mum/2005 “Loss on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of balance sheet in respect of loans taken for revenue purposes is allowable as expenditure u/s.37(1), notwithstanding the fact that liability h…