← All Phrases

“Section 43(5)”

Section References (mined)Section 43Section 43(5)238 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 43(5) is CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd. (312 ITR 254), cited in 968 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 43(5)

CIT v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd.
312 ITR 254 · 2009 · Supreme Court
968
citing judgments

Foreign exchange fluctuations, whether gains or losses, are inextricably linked to the underlying business transaction and must be accounted for under the mercantile system. The Supreme Court also affirmed the standard accounting principle of valuing stock at cost or net realisable value, whichever is lower.

Brooke Bond India Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 798 · 1997 · Supreme Court
228
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for increasing a company's share capital or expanding its capital base, such as expenses related to the issue of shares, constitutes capital expenditure. Such expenses are not deductible as revenue expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, even if they incidentally benefit the business.

DCIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd.
88 ITD 273 · 2004 · ITAT
169
citing judgments

Interest, sales tax, and purchase tax subsidies received by an assessee are generally considered capital receipts, not revenue income, for income tax purposes.

Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. CIT
225 ITR 792 · 1997 · Supreme Court
158
citing judgments

Expenditure incurred for increasing a company's share capital, such as expenses related to issuing shares or an initial public offering (IPO), is capital expenditure. Such expenses are not allowable as a revenue deduction under Section 37, even if they incidentally benefit the business, because they result in an increase in capital.

CIT v. Chaphalkar Brothers
400 ITR 279 · 2018 · Supreme Court
136
citing judgments

A subsidy is classified as a capital receipt if its object is to enable the assessee to set up or expand a new or existing unit. Conversely, it is a revenue receipt if its purpose is to help the assessee run the business more profitably.

CIT v. Rittal India (P) Limited
380 ITR 423 · 2016 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Additional depreciation is allowable under section 32(1)(iia) for new machinery or plant even when put to use for less than 180 days, with the unabsorbed balance available for claim in the subsequent year.

CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd.
261 ITR 256 · 2003 · High Court
114
citing judgments

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.

CIT v. Oswal Agro Mills Ltd.
341 ITR 467 · 2012 · High Court
108
citing judgments

The Legislature abolished terminal depreciation under section 32(1)(iii) and the taxing of balancing charge under section 41(2), replacing these provisions with the requirement to reduce sale proceeds of depreciable assets from the block of assets.

Judgments citing Section 43(5)

Smt Rashmi Ramesh Damani, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle 17(1), Mumbai

ITA 1129/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri M. P. LohiaFor Respondent: Shri Vikas Chandra
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

advances given to the brokers. The AO, for the instant year held that the assessee is dealing in speculative transactions and invoked provisions Section 43(5) of the Act. The AO has also held that the assessee has been carrying trade in commodity derivatives. Section 43(5)(e) considers ... revenue to the transactions undertaken by the assessee, finding of the AO that the assessee is into commodity derivatives, provisions o f the Section 43(5) invoked by the AO, provisions o f Section 43(5)(e) relied upon by the ld. AR, Explanation (2) of Section 43

DCIT 4 (3)(1), Mumbai vs. J M Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Revenue‟s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 6729/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry(Jm)& Shri Prabhash Shankar (Am) The Dcit-4(3)(1) J.M. Financial Services Ltd. 7Th Floor, Cnergy, Appasaheb Room No. 649 Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Maratahe Marg M.K. Road Prabhadevi, Mumbai Mumbai-400 020. 400 025. Pan : Aaacj5977A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shrik. Shivram & Shri Sanjay Parikh Revenue By : Shri Vivek Perampurna Date Of Hearing : 29/10/2025 Date Of : 24/12/2025 Pronouncement O R D E R Per Narender Kumar Choudhry (Jm) :-

For Appellant: ShriK. Shivram & Shri SanjayFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Perampurna
Section 250Section 73

mention that if first F&O purchase was made and then the case purchase was made, it cannot be treated as arbitrage under Section 43(5) of the Act. So, in sum, the loss on delivery based transactions is treated as speculation loss and set-off is not allowed ... form a continuum of string of transactions of the natureof arbitrage operations. The assessee's arguments are considered but are not tenable because Section 43(5) of the Act lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation

Hind Ceramics Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 10(1), Kolkatq

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 609/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Dcit, Circle 10(1) Hind Ceramics Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, P-7, 147, Nilganj Road, Belghoria, Chowringhee Square, Vs. Kolkata-700056, West Bengal Kolkata-700069, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaach7998D Assessee By : S/Shri Soumitra Choudhury & P. Sarkar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Madhumita Das, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 19.11.2025

For Appellant: S/shri Soumitra Choudhury &For Respondent: Shri Madhumita Das, DR

concur with approach of the assessing officer to tax the advances against sale of flats as speculative transaction by invoking section 43(5) but it is to be taxed as profit on sale of right as income of the assessee. Thus Ground No. 6 to 8 are dismissed.” 2.3. After ... these transactions of assignment taken place without delivering the flats and therefore, gain arises out of the speculative transactions within the meaning of Section 43(5)of the Act and accordingly, it was added to the income of the assessee as speculative profit. 4.3. In the appellate proceedings

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax- 2(1)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai vs. Foods and Inns Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5657/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Ms. N.V.Kulkarni,ARFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik,(Sr. DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 43(5)

treating the earning on foreign exchange forward contracts as regular business income and not speculation gain disregarding the fact that the provision of section 43(5) are applicable in this case?" 3. The registry has pointed out that the appeal is delayed by 11 days. Considering the delay being negligible ... nature of hedging to avoid loss in foreign currency rate fluctuations and the same was covered by the first proviso to section 43(5) of the Act. The assessee also relied on various case laws that the forward contract gain was not speculative in nature. However

ACIT 4(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Glorishine Impex Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2209/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 43(5)Section 72

actual delivery or transfer of goods, held that the contracts were in the nature of speculative transactions within the meaning of section 43(5). He therefore re characterised the said loss of Rs.79,40,12,784 as speculation loss. On such re classification, he computed the business income

Pcl Foods Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. Addi CIT, National E- Assesment Centre, New Delhi

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 442/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2016-17] Pcl Foods Private Limited, Additional / Joint/ Unit No.-219, Plot No. 2, Deputy/Assistant Vardhman Crown Mall, Lsc, Vs Commissioner Of Income Sector 19, Dwarka, New Tax/ Income Tax Officer, Delhi-110075. National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi. Pan- Aahcp3493L Assessee Revenue

Section 143(3)Section 92C

eligible transactions as per Section 45(3) of the Act read with proviso (d) and explanation 1 to section 43(5) of the Act. 10.1 The AO after analyzing the definition of an eligible transaction as provided in clause (d) of proviso to section 43(5) of the Act held ... foreign currency. 10.2. The AO after making analyzing the facts, held that currency derivatives do not fall within the in proviso to section 43(5) of the Act and therefore, treated them as speculative transaction. ITA No.- 442/Del/2021 PCL Foods Pvt. Ltd. 10.3. Further with regard to brokerage & commission paid

J vs. Exports, Maduraivs.DCIT, Ncc-2, Madurai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2059/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.:2059/Chny/2025 यनिाारणवर्ा / Assessment Year:2013-14 Jvs Export, Deputy Commissioner Of No.32, Sarojini Street, Vs. Income Tax, Chinna Chokkikulam, Non-Corporate Circle-2 Madurai, Madurai. Tamil Nadu-625 002. [Pan:Aabfj2836N] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थीकीओरसे/Appellant By : Mr.N.Arjun Raj, Advocate प्रत्यर्थीकीओरसे/Revenue By : Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.10.2025 घोर्णाकीतारीख/Date Of Pronouncement: 16.10.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per M. Balaganesh, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Filed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, (In Short Ld.Cit(A) For The Assessment Year 2013-14, Vide Order Dated 21.05.2025. 2. The Preliminary Issue Raised By The Assessee Is Challenging The Validity Of Assumption Of Jurisdiction For Reopening The Assessment In The Instant Case. 3. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions & Perused The Materials Available On Record. The Assessee Is A Partnership Firm & Had Filed Its

For Appellant: Mr.N.Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.R.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 43(5)Section 73(1)

profit and loss account, you had claimed Rs 81,93,973/- as expenditure in “Loss on cancellation of forward contract”. However, as per section 43(5) of the I.T Act, 1961, the loss on cancellation of forward contract is a speculation loss and as per section

Ridhi Vincom Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 947/KOL/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 4(1) Ridhi Vincom Pvt. Ltd. Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, C/O M/S Salarpuriajajodia& Co. P-7, Chowringhee Square, 7, C.R. Avenue, 3 Rd Floor, Vs. 8Th Floor, Kolkata-700069, Kolkata-700072, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaecr9858C Assessee By : Shri S. Jhajharia, Ar Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 17.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri S. Jhajharia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR
Section 43(5)(d)

Vincom Pvt. Ltd.; Ay 2013-14 currency segment of the recognized stock exchange, i.e., BSE and has complied with other conditions stipulated in Section 43(5) read with proviso (d) thereto. The contract for Currency Derivative Transaction (CDT) executed through the registered share broker on the platform of the stock ... sample basis to demonstrate that CDT executed by the assessee falls within the definition of ‘eligible transaction’ as per Explanation-1 appended below Section 43(5) of the Act. It was thus contended that theCDT being ‘eligible transaction’ falls within the exceptions carved out to Section 43(5

DCIT 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jm Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6362/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 255Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 73(4)

continuum of string of transactions of the nature of arbitrage operations. The assessee‟s arguments are considered but are not tenable because Section 43(5) of the Act lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions ... assessee‟s argument makes sense if Revenue was to treat as transactions as speculation with respect to F&O. Post amendment to Section 43(5)of the Act vide the insertion of the proviso, it is clear that income from F&O transactions are to be treated as business income

Jm Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - Circle -4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6114/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 255Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 73(4)

continuum of string of transactions of the nature of arbitrage operations. The assessee‟s arguments are considered but are not tenable because Section 43(5) of the Act lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions ... assessee‟s argument makes sense if Revenue was to treat as transactions as speculation with respect to F&O. Post amendment to Section 43(5)of the Act vide the insertion of the proviso, it is clear that income from F&O transactions are to be treated as business income

Jm Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT - Circle -4(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3175/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 255Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 73(4)

continuum of string of transactions of the nature of arbitrage operations. The assessee‟s arguments are considered but are not tenable because Section 43(5) of the Act lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions ... assessee‟s argument makes sense if Revenue was to treat as transactions as speculation with respect to F&O. Post amendment to Section 43(5)of the Act vide the insertion of the proviso, it is clear that income from F&O transactions are to be treated as business income

DCIT- 4(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Jm Financial Services Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed and the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3144/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 255Section 43Section 43(5)Section 73Section 73(4)

continuum of string of transactions of the nature of arbitrage operations. The assessee‟s arguments are considered but are not tenable because Section 43(5) of the Act lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions ... assessee‟s argument makes sense if Revenue was to treat as transactions as speculation with respect to F&O. Post amendment to Section 43(5)of the Act vide the insertion of the proviso, it is clear that income from F&O transactions are to be treated as business income

Anupam Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 765/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalanupam Sharma, Flat No. 1-994 Block No. B-24, Rangoli Garden Near Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur 302 021 Pan No.: Awpps 0767D ...... Appellant

For Appellant: Mr. Ashish Khandelwal, CA, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Mr. Dharam Singh Meena, JCIT- Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5

which is itself questionable because Section 44AD of the Act does not apply to derivative trading income (being non-speculative business as per Section 43(5) of the Act. Later, the assessee shifted stance and claimed specific expenses, reducing profit. This change in stand without any supporting evidence indicates

Nirmal Kumar Dugar, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1) Jaipur, Jaipur

Appeal is allowed

ITA 130/JPR/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Oct 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal.

For Appellant: Sh. Sauravh Harsh, Adv., Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT, Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 43(5)Section 44A

engaged in shares and securities transactions, speculative in nature, of the value of Rs. 18,39,385/-in view of provisions of section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and further that the assessee had failed to establish business loss of Rs. 18,39,385/-from the transactions ... called upon to show cause as to why said amount be not treated as speculative loss in view of the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act and charged to income tax upto the income of Rs. 13,62,692/-found to have been set off by him under

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Fiem Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3696/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri M. Balaganeshdcit, Vs. M/S. Fiem Industries Ltd, Circle-9(1), D-34, Dsidc Packaging New Delhi Complex, Kirti Nagr, New Delhi-110015 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaacf1034E Assessee By : Shri Shailesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Namita Khurana, Cit-Dr (On Rotational Duty) Date Of Hearing 13/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/10/2025

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Namita Khurana, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 80I

Learned AO sought to treat both the losses as arising from speculative transactions under the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act and accordingly did not allow set off against the profits of the business. It was submitted that the loss on settlement of the target redemption 5. forward ... were lower than the contracted amounts. j. The Assessing Officer held that the transactions do not fall under proviso (a) to Section 43 (5) and finally concluded that the loss being a speculative is to be disallowed. k. The Assessing Officer has stated that the claim of the loss

ACIT, Circle-26(2), New Delhi vs. Vng Impex P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5917/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (Vice President), SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 44ASection 68

held to be speculation loss. In any case, since the transactions have led to short- term capital loss, the question of applicability of section 43(5) will not arise." 14 10. Ld. DR submitted that after considering the above submissions, ld. CIT (A) deleted the additions with regard to Naïve ... loss. In any case, since the transactions have been held to have led to short term capital loss, the question of applicability of section 43(5) would not arise Accordingly, the addition of Rs.1,87,172/- is deleted.” 14. With regard to ground no.3, ld. DR submitted that

B & B Sharecom Pvt Ltd., Hisar vs. DCIT, Circle, Hisar

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

ITA 2877/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shris.Rifaur Rahmanb & B Sharecom Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, Circle, 133, 1St Floor, Parijat Complex, Hisar. Hisar – 125 001. (Pan :Aagcb1363A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. Sampath, Advocate Shri V Rajakumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Abhishek Deavel, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.08.2025 Date Of Order : 24.09.2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhishek Deavel, Sr. DR
Section 133Section 143(2)Section 271Section 43(5)Section 68

being the amount of loss suffered on intraday transactions on stock exchange treating the same as speculative in terms of section 43(5) of the Act; D. not allowing set-off of loss suffered on intraday transactions against profit earned by the assessee on commodity derivatives which are not chargeable ... Code 03 refers to the intra-day transactions without payment of STT made speculative business transactions. With reference to provisions of section 43(5) of the Act, the AO observed that the speculative transactions of non- payment of STT falls within the ambit of provisions of section 43(5) however

Ocl India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4068/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.4068/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Dalmia Bharat Ltd., (Successor In The Interest Of Ocl India Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aabco-8750-F बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 19(1), C R Building New Delhi 110095 आअसं.3767/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Uditnagar, Rourkela, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Dist. Sundargarh, Odisha 769012 बनाम Vs. Dalmia Bharat Ltd., Successor Of Ocl India Ltd., 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aabco-8750-F

For Appellant: S/Shri Vijay Shah, Navin Verma &For Respondent: Shri Amaninder Singh Dhindsa &
Section 43(5)Section 43ASection 53A

income of the assessee. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) held that the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act though not applicable, section 53A of the Act which provides for capitalization of foreign exchange gain/loss with the cost of asset

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3767/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandraआअसं.4068/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Dalmia Bharat Ltd., (Successor In The Interest Of Ocl India Ltd.) 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Pan: Aabco-8750-F बनाम Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Circle 19(1), C R Building New Delhi 110095 आअसं.3767/िद"ी/2015(िन.व. 2007-08) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Aayakar Bhawan, Uditnagar, Rourkela, ...... अपीलाथ"/Appellant Dist. Sundargarh, Odisha 769012 बनाम Vs. Dalmia Bharat Ltd., Successor Of Ocl India Ltd., 11Th & 12Th Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi 110001 ..... "ितवादी/Respondent Pan: Aabco-8750-F

For Appellant: S/Shri Vijay Shah, Navin Verma &For Respondent: Shri Amaninder Singh Dhindsa &
Section 43(5)Section 43ASection 53A

income of the assessee. The assessee carried the issue in appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) held that the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act though not applicable, section 53A of the Act which provides for capitalization of foreign exchange gain/loss with the cost of asset

ACIT, Cir 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Western India Garments Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 4211/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Pico Capital Private Limited Deputy Commissioner Of (Successor In Interest Of M/S Income Tax-8(3)(2), Western India Garments Private Mumbai Limited ) 22(1) Bombay Cotton Miis Vs. Compound, Dattaram Lad Path Kalachowky, Mumbai - 400033 (Pan: Aaacw2493G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Western India Garments Tax - 8(2)(1), Private Limited Mumbai 22(1) Bombay Cotton Miis Compound, Vs. Dattaram Lad Path Kalachowky, Mumbai - 400033 (Pan: Aaacw2493G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Dharan Gandhi, Advocate Revenue : Shri Arun Kanti Datta, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2025 O R D E R Pico Capital Pvt Ltd. & Western India Garments Pvt Ltd. Ay 2014-15 Per Girish Agrawal: These Two Appeals Filed By Assessee & Revenue Are Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1056675304(1), Dated 29.09.2023 Passed Against The Assessment Order By Dcit, Circle - 8(3)(2), Mumbai, U/S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 13.12.2016 For Assessment Year 2014- 15. 2. Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under: 1. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 13,52,543/- Made U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D Of The Rules Over & Above The Disallowance Of Rs. 11,02,185/- Made By The Appellant. 2. The Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Dated 13.12.2016 Is Bad In Law As The Same Has Been Passed In The Name Of The Non-Existent Person. 3. The Ld. Ao, Has Erred In The Levying Interest Under Section 234B Of The Act. 4. The Ld. Ao Erred In Initiating Penalty Proceedings U/S 271(1)(C) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Dharan Gandhi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kanti Datta, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(vii)

letter of NSEL, among other particulars clearly mentions the warehouse location where the said commodity owned by the assessee company is stored  Further section 43(5) of the Act provides as follows: “speculative transaction" means a transaction in which a contract for the purchase or sale of any commodity, including