← 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)

Titan Company Limited 9Earstwhile Known As Titan Industries Limited), Krishnagiri vs. ACIT Ltu 1, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 505/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri T. Surya Narayana, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143(3)

considered on revenue account, the same are unascertained liability. Therefore, he held that this being speculative loss, is covered by the provisions of section 43(5)(d) of the Act and hence, not allowable. Accordingly, the AO disallowed the marked to market loss claimed by assessee at Rs.2

Sachin Kanodia, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 42(2), New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 9504/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

Section 142(2)Section 143(2)Section 2Section 68Section 69C

action of ld AO in making addition of Rs 64,90,468/- without appreciating spirit of law contained in section 10(38) and section 43(5)(d) where statutory status is provided to evidences generated from stock exchange system treating the same to be impeccable and only from finance

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. J.K. Technosoft Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 6160/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Pradip Kumar Kedia & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Dcit Vs. J. K. Techno Soft Ltd. Circle 13(2) A-2, Shopping Complex, C. R. Building Masjid Moth, Greater New Delhi Kailsah Part-Ii New Delhi Pan: Aaacj0381L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv & Sh. Himanshu Goel, Ca Revenue By Shri Rajesh Mahajan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2024 Order

Section 115J

ground that since the transaction entered into Forex Directive by the assessee Company do not fall in the exclusionary clauses of Section 43(5) of the Act. The Forex Directive loss declared by the assessee Company 11 DCIT Vs. J. K. Technosoft clearly falls within the definition of speculative transaction ... tune of Rs.4,18,22,913/- which was disallowed by the AO holding the same to be speculative in nature under section 43(5) of the Act. As reproduced earlier, in its submission, the appellant has stated that the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act apply only

M/S. La Opala RG Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata.

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

ITA 965/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80l

level. It is dealt by Accounting Standards 11. 6.4. Further, assessee claimed that it is not a speculative transaction within the meaning of section 43(5). Assessee placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of ITO Vs. LGW Ltd. in (2017) 83 taxmann.com ... arising out of fluctuation in foreign currency, loss of such transaction could not be held as speculative transaction falling within the ambit of section 43(5). 6.5. Assessee also contended that in the preceding years i.e. AYs 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 have been assessed

M/S. La Opala RG Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata-12(1), Kol., Kolkata

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

ITA 964/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata03 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri A. K. Tulsiyan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Prabhakar Prakash Ranjan, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80l

level. It is dealt by Accounting Standards 11. 6.4. Further, assessee claimed that it is not a speculative transaction within the meaning of section 43(5). Assessee placed reliance on the decision of Coordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of ITO Vs. LGW Ltd. in (2017) 83 taxmann.com ... arising out of fluctuation in foreign currency, loss of such transaction could not be held as speculative transaction falling within the ambit of section 43(5). 6.5. Assessee also contended that in the preceding years i.e. AYs 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13 have been assessed

Concept Images Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-7(1), Kolata., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1201/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Mar 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Rajesh Kumari.T.A No.1201/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Concept Images Pvt. Ltd…………………………… ........................……Appellant 4Th Floor, Azimganj House, 7, Camac Street, Circus Avenue, S.O., Kolkata – 700017. [Pan: Aabcc1959L] Vs. Dcit, Circle-7(1), Kolkata...................…................…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Ankur Goyal, Jcit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 10, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 22, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 19.10.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Sole Issue Raised In This Appeal Is As To Marked To Market Loss Incurred By The Assessee On Hedging Of The Transaction Is To Be Treated As Speculative Loss Or Normal Business Loss. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is In Business Of Purchase & Sale Of Bullions & Also Manufacturers Of Gold Ornaments. Since The Price Of Gold Constantly Fluctuates, To Safeguard Itself From Loss, If Any, Due To Fluctuation The Appellant Had Entered Into Future Contracts With The Suppliers Of Gold To Safeguard Against Loss

Section 250Section 37Section 43(5)

business. The Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding to this effect in its order. The Assessing Officer has not considered these facts. Under section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, "speculative transaction" has been defined to mean a transaction in which a contract for the purchase or sale

DCIT, Corporate Circle, Madurai vs. M/S Standard Match Indusries Private Limited, Sivakasi

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 485/CHNY/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Mar 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.485/Chny/2023 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Dcit M/S. Standard Match Industries Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ Corporate Circle 5-2-15C, Sattur Road, Vs. Madurai. Sivakasi-626 123. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaccs-5742-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (Cit)- Ld. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Final Hearing : 31-01-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22-03-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri R. Clement Ramesh Kumar (CIT)- Ld. DRFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar (Advocate) -Ld. AR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 43(5)Section 73

fact that when no actual delivery has taken place, the transactions in question fall within the definition of speculative transaction as per section 43(5) of the Income-Tax Act? 4. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is legally correct by holding ... carried on by the assessee through a Bank and not through a recognized stock exchange are also covered by the proviso (d) to Section 43(5) when the pre-conditions laid by the Explanation to the said proviso is not satisfied to constitute it as an eligible transaction

Lupin Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 77/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri PranayFor Respondent: Ms. Manju Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

expenditure by placing reliance on the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 dated 23.03.2010. The AO also rejected the assessee's alternate plea that since section 43(5) is not applicable the MTM losses should be allowed under section 28 or 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before ... Vinodkumar Diamonds (P.) Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal held the forward contract on facts before it to be speculative in nature in view of Section 43(5) of the Act. However, it appears that the decision of this court in CIT v. Badridas Gauridu

Asstt. CIT -Circle-3(4), Mumbai vs. M/S. Lupin Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in I

ITA 1241/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Mar 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Shri Rajan Vora, Shri PranayFor Respondent: Ms. Manju Thakur, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)

expenditure by placing reliance on the CBDT Instruction No. 3/2010 dated 23.03.2010. The AO also rejected the assessee's alternate plea that since section 43(5) is not applicable the MTM losses should be allowed under section 28 or 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved the assessee filed appeal before ... Vinodkumar Diamonds (P.) Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal held the forward contract on facts before it to be speculative in nature in view of Section 43(5) of the Act. However, it appears that the decision of this court in CIT v. Badridas Gauridu

Megapode Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 1(2), Kolkata

In the result, ITA No. 98/KOL/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 98/KOL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Mar 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sri Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 250Section 43(5)

earned by the assesses. Loss in Trading in currency derivative is speculative loss as per definition of Speculative transaction provided in section 43(5) of the I. T. Act, which defines speculative transaction ds under Section 43(5) of the I. T. Act: “Speculative transaction” means a transaction in which ... important to mention that the trading in derivatives in foreign currency is not covered in any of the exceptions provided in section 43(5) reproduced above including the exception provided in proviso (d) of section 43(5) as the exception mentioned here is with regard to the derivatives referred

Lupin Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Dy CIT, Circle-3(4), Mumbai

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and revenue are treated as partly allowed

ITA 1921/MUM/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Mumbai “A” Bench, Mumbai. Before Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (JM

Ambicaa Sales Corporation, Bengaluru vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Bengaluru - 5, Bengaluru

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

ITA 726/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Balram R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 43

ledger for profits from MCX and loss from MCX has been furnished. Regarding the allowability of such loss, reliance has been placed upon Section 43(5)(d) of the IT Act, 1961. Further, it has been submitted that as per Notification No.46/2009, dated 22.05.2009, MCX has been including ... incurred. The AO has allowed such loss on the explanation of the assessee that transactions done on MCX are not speculative as per section 43(5)(d) r.w. Notification No.46/2009 dated 22.05.2009. The ld. Pr.CIT observed section 43(5)(d) is applicable to trading in derivatives and admittedly the assessee

Kulvinder Nath Marwah, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-29(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 945/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH (Accountant Member), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 12Section 143(3)Section 43(5)Section 69

intermediary registered under section 12 of the SEBI Act and accordingly treated the said derivative transaction as a speculative transaction in terms of section 43(5) of the Act and disallowed the same. Consequently, the ld. AO denied the set off of the derivative loss against the profits

DCIT, Cir-3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. East West Pipeline Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, without any adjudication upon the merits, Ground No. 5 to 8 to raised by the Revenue are dismissed as being infructuous

ITA 1999/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 73(1)

held that the aforesaid loss was not speculative in nature, and 4 therefore, fell outside in the ambit of the provisions contained in Section 43(5) read with Section 73 of the Act. Being aggrieved by the above relief granted by the CIT(A), the 5. Revenue is in appeal ... activity which is speculative in nature. Such speculative currency swap contracts are derivatives and are not excluded from the clause (d) to the section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act but the assessee has not declared them as speculative or that it falls in the exception given by clause

DCIT-1(1), Bhopal vs. Shri Prakash Bhojwani, Bhopal

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 172/IND/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore02 Jan 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2010-11 Dy. Cit, Shri Prakash Bhojwani, 1(1), H.No. 7, Parika Phase-I, Bhopal Walmi Road, बनाम/ Chuna Bhatti, Vs. Bhopal (Revenue / Respondent) (Assessee / Appellant) Pan: Abvpb 8825 E Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Harshit Bari, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 02.01.2024

Section 111ASection 111USection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 28

pertaining to the intraday sale and purchase of shares which can be treated as business income as per the provisions of section 43(5) of the Act. The share transactions settled otherwise than physical delivery are to be treated as speculative transactions as per section 43(5). The remaining transactions

Mahendra Ravindra Salunkhe, Panvel City vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

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

ITA 3204/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jan 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharymahendra Ravindra Vs. Income Tax Officer Salunkhe, A-202, 35(2)(3) Swarganaga Chs Ltd, Plot Kautilya Bhavan No.62, Sector 18, Bkc, 400050 Kamothe, Panvel City, Mumbai Raigarh- 410209 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No:Bkfps6678L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Lieder Panicker Date Of Hearing 27.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 01.01.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A) Nfac, Dated 11.07.2023 For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. In The Appeal The Assessee Had Stated That He Had The Total Income Of Rs.2,26,652. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Had Given The Assessee An Opportunity To Hear, Firstly In The Year Of 2021 However Due To Second Wave Of Covid 19 He Was Not Able To Attend The Same As During The Concerned Period Survival Was The Only Challenge. Later, The Concerned Assessee In The Year 2023 Was Diagnosed With Medical Illness Which Impaired His Physical Inability & Mental Stability To Attend The Hearings. The Order Was Dismissed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals By Passing An Order Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 11/07/2023. The Notices Received From The Cit Appeals Did Not Contain Any Specific Information To Be Submitted Due To Which The Assessee Was Under The Presumption That They Will Ask Additional Questions In The Next Notice. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend, Alter Or Delete The Said Ground Of Appeal.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Lieder Panicker
Section 148Section 194HSection 250Section 250(6)Section 43(5)

P a g e | 1 Sangeeta Pratap Singh Vs. ITO, Ward-2(4) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -3(2), Mumbai vs. Viraj Profiles Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above directions

ITA 2164/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleviraj Profiles Pvt Ltd V. Dy. Cit - Central Circle- 3(2) (Formerly Known As Viraj Profiles Limited) Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor 1St Floor, Viraj Towers Air India Building Jn Of Andheri Kurla Road Nariman Point W.E. Highway, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400021 Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabcv1740N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Central Circle- 3(2) V. Viraj Profiles Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As Viraj Profiles Limited) Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor 1St Floor, Viraj Towers Air India Building, Nariman Jn Of Andheri Kurla Road Point W.E. Highway, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400021 Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabcv1740N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Mani Jain Department Represented By : Shri. Ujjawal Kumar Chavan

Section 250Section 37Section 80G

case of Bechtel India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2017) 82 taxmann.com 30 Delhi Trib.) following was held.- Section 28(i), read with section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Business loss/deductions Allowable as (Forward exchange contracts) - Assessment year 2009-10- Whether where assessee, to avoid any unforeseen losses

Viraj Profiles Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as per above directions

ITA 1213/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleviraj Profiles Pvt Ltd V. Dy. Cit - Central Circle- 3(2) (Formerly Known As Viraj Profiles Limited) Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor 1St Floor, Viraj Towers Air India Building Jn Of Andheri Kurla Road Nariman Point W.E. Highway, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400021 Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabcv1740N (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Cit - Central Circle- 3(2) V. Viraj Profiles Pvt Ltd (Formerly Known As Viraj Profiles Limited) Room No. 1923, 19Th Floor 1St Floor, Viraj Towers Air India Building, Nariman Jn Of Andheri Kurla Road Point W.E. Highway, Andheri (E) Mumbai- 400021 Mumbai- 400093 Pan: Aabcv1740N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Mani Jain Department Represented By : Shri. Ujjawal Kumar Chavan

Section 250Section 37Section 80G

case of Bechtel India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT (2017) 82 taxmann.com 30 Delhi Trib.) following was held.- Section 28(i), read with section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961- Business loss/deductions Allowable as (Forward exchange contracts) - Assessment year 2009-10- Whether where assessee, to avoid any unforeseen losses

M/S H.B. Leasing & Finance Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5089/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshand, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

issued 2003) to support the accounting method adopted by the assessee. 11.5 The ld. counsel next submitted that for the purposes of Section 43(5) defining speculative transactions, the profits/losses arising from derivative transactions fall outside the purview of Section 43(5) and consequently the loss arising on such transactions ... submitted that derivative transactions were carried out on the platform of NSE and such transactions are entitled to benefit under proviso (d) to Section 43(5) in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of CIT vs. Nasa Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 38 taxmann.com

M/S. H.B. Leasing & Finance Company Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2323/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar Us

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Mr. Waseem Arshand, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 69B

issued 2003) to support the accounting method adopted by the assessee. 11.5 The ld. counsel next submitted that for the purposes of Section 43(5) defining speculative transactions, the profits/losses arising from derivative transactions fall outside the purview of Section 43(5) and consequently the loss arising on such transactions ... submitted that derivative transactions were carried out on the platform of NSE and such transactions are entitled to benefit under proviso (d) to Section 43(5) in the light of the judgment rendered in the case of CIT vs. Nasa Finlease Pvt. Ltd. (2013) 38 taxmann.com