“speculation loss”

Rajat Commercial Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 11(1)(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

income. The learned Departmental Representative referred to return of income originally filed where the total income is ₹ nil. It was further stated that the speculation loss has been earned by the assessee is carried forward. Therefore, the return deserves to be treated at ₹ nil only. Thus, it was stated that

Udayan Grover, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre(NFAC), Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleudayan Grover V. National Faceless Appeal Centre Panch Mahal Delhi Panch Sristhi Complex {Acit – 26(3), Bkc, Mumbai} Powai, Mumbai - 400072 Pan: Aclpg0572G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Ms. Kavitha Kaushik

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

Albert Santan Dcosta, Thane vs. ITO, Ward1(1), Thane

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri.Narender Kumar Choudhry () & Miss. Padmavathy S. ()

according to the P&L account does not show any income being credited under the head speculation. As per section 73 of the Act, speculation losses can be set off only against speculation income, if any derived by the Assessee. Accordingly the claim of speculation loss of Rs.7 ... well as mail, the contents of the same reads as under:- “ Vide the Questionnaire Dt. 07/09/2018 you were requested to submit proof of speculation loss and justification for set off of the same with business income. In the P&L account you have shown net profit at Rs.19

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

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

fall under the exceptions mentioned in proviso under 43(5) of the Act and therefore the AO had correctly denied adjustment of this speculation loss against the normal business income as per the provisions of section 73(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 6. Whether on the facts ... assessee has not declared them as speculative or that it falls in the exception given by clause (d) of section 43(5). Such speculative loss could not be adjusted against the normal business income as per the provisions of section 73(1) of the Income Tax Act. Thus, all these

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 19(3), Mumbai vs. Sanjiv Mahendra Parikh, Mumbai

Bench: 31.03.2014.”

raised following grounds of appeal: 2. 1. “Whether Ld.CIT(A) is right in deleting the addition made u/s 43(5) of the Act towards speculative loss without appreciating action of the Assessing Officer. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in deleting the addition made ... towards speculative loss. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in deleting of total addition of Rs. 3,18,43,201/- as the same was dealt by the AO and ultimately treated the same as speculative loss based upon its nature of transaction and investment made by the future

Jitendra Udaylal Jain, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blejitendra Udaylal Jain V. National Faceless Assessment Centre(Nfac) C/O. M/S. Alankar Jewellers Shop Delhi No.1 Municipal Building R.A. Kidwai Road, Wadala Mumbai- 400037 Pan: Aabpj5480E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri. Vimal Punmiya Department Represented By : Shri. Ujjawal Kumar Chavan

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI

Dam Capital Advisors Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT-4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming disallowance of loss of F 15,48,6477- by alleging the same as speculation loss. 2.1 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that assessee has not undertaken any trading equity segment and derivatives segment ... Addition Amount – Rs. 1 Disallowance under section 36(1)(iii) r.w.s. 57(iii) 56,50,752 2 Addition towards business loss held as speculation loss 15,48,647 3 Addition towards bonus liability 3,50,00,000 4 Adhoc disallowance of expenses at 20% 88,76,000 5 Disallowance under

Mrs Rajani S.Iyer, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 20(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Ita No. 2239 & 2240/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Rajani S Iyer, Acit-20(3), 14/222, Bhaskar Bhavan, Mumbai-400001 Vs. Sri Balachandra Road, Matunga, Mumbai-400019. Pan No. Aaopi 9178 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Haridas Bhat Revenue By : Mrs. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 11/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

income instead modification done by broker to normal business income instead modification done by broker to normal business income instead reducing the same from speculation loss of Rs.73,86, 173/ g the same from speculation loss of Rs.73,86, 173/ g the same from speculation loss of Rs.73 ... based transaction to be set off against delivery based transactions trading delivery based transactions trading holding the same holding the same as speculation speculation speculation loss. loss. loss. The The The Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer also also also disallowed disallowed disallowed Mrs. Rajani S Iyer non- -delivery based

Mrs Rajani S. Iyer, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-20(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeal

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Ita No. 2239 & 2240/Mum/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Mrs. Rajani S Iyer, Acit-20(3), 14/222, Bhaskar Bhavan, Mumbai-400001 Vs. Sri Balachandra Road, Matunga, Mumbai-400019. Pan No. Aaopi 9178 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Haridas Bhat Revenue By : Mrs. Mahita Nair, Dr : Date Of Hearing 11/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

income instead modification done by broker to normal business income instead modification done by broker to normal business income instead reducing the same from speculation loss of Rs.73,86, 173/ g the same from speculation loss of Rs.73,86, 173/ g the same from speculation loss of Rs.73 ... based transaction to be set off against delivery based transactions trading delivery based transactions trading holding the same holding the same as speculation speculation speculation loss. loss. loss. The The The Assessing Assessing Assessing Officer Officer Officer also also also disallowed disallowed disallowed Mrs. Rajani S Iyer non- -delivery based

Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Circle-4(1), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited The Dcit 1402, 14Th Floor, Circle -4(1), First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Aaecs7234F Citigroup Global Markets (India) The Jcit (Osd) Private Limited 4(1)(1) 1402, 14Th Floor, Room No. 640, 6 Th Floor, First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan, Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, Ars Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

holding that the above provision applies to the purchase and the sale of shares and therefore the loss on trade is treated as a speculation loss. d. Assessee has paid a sum of ₹ 1,981,158 levied on the assessee by the stock exchange as penalty relating to non-maintenance ... that losses have arising on account of error trades only. Therefore, provisions of section 73 of the income tax act with respect to the speculation loss does not apply in case of the assessee. Accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned

Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD)-4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Citigroup Global Markets (India) Private Limited The Dcit 1402, 14Th Floor, Circle -4(1), First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai-400 020 G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No.Aaecs7234F Citigroup Global Markets (India) The Jcit (Osd) Private Limited 4(1)(1) 1402, 14Th Floor, Room No. 640, 6 Th Floor, First International Financial Aaykar Bhavan, Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, G Block, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 051 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nishant Thakkar & Mr. Jasmin Amalsadwala, Ars Revenue By : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari, Dr Date Of Hearing: 04/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 25/10/2023

holding that the above provision applies to the purchase and the sale of shares and therefore the loss on trade is treated as a speculation loss. d. Assessee has paid a sum of ₹ 1,981,158 levied on the assessee by the stock exchange as penalty relating to non-maintenance ... that losses have arising on account of error trades only. Therefore, provisions of section 73 of the income tax act with respect to the speculation loss does not apply in case of the assessee. Accordingly we do not find any infirmity in the order of the learned

Gajshkati Agrotech Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & Amarjit Singh, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.1506/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Gajshakti Agrotech Pvt. बिधम/ Ito, Ward-7(1)(1) Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Ground Floor, 414, Empire Churchgate, Mumbai- Business Centre Empire 400020. Industries Ltd. Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Maharashtra- 400013. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcg4838J (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dharan Gandhi Revenue By: Shri Yogendra T Wakare (Sr. Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 30/08/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Company Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac, Delhi Dated 26.03.2023 For Ay. 2012- 13. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Sustaining The Addition Of Rs.99,73,650/- On Account Of Speculation Profit Made By The Ao. 3. Brief Facts Are That The Assessee Company Was Engaged In The Business Of Manufacturing & Trading Of Agro Products & Other Commodities. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income On 29.09.2012 Declaring Loss Of Rs.2,85,374/-. Later, The Case Of The Assessee Was Selected For Scrutiny. & The Ao Noted That The Assessee Has Claimed Carry Forward Of Speculation Loss Of Rs.2,85,374/-. The Ao Asked The Assessee About The Details Of The Commodity Transaction Vide Order Sheet Noting Dated 13.01.2015. The Ao Notes That The Assessee Submitted Ledger Account Of Speculation Loss Wherein It Was Found

Later, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny. And the AO noted that the assessee has claimed carry forward of speculation loss of Rs.2,85,374/-. The AO asked the assessee about the details of the commodity transaction vide order sheet noting dated 13.01.2015. The AO notes that ... assessee submitted ledger account of speculation loss wherein it was found 2 A.Y. 2012-13 Gajshakti Agrotech Pvt. Ltd. inter-alia that assessee earned profit of Rs.11,10,43,769/- from M/s. Anand Rathi Commodities, and loss of Rs.9,96,73,748/- from M/s. Masitla Commodities Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter

Mondelez India Foods P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 5(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

allowed as business expenditure. The Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee and proceeded to treat the loss as a speculative loss. The Assessing Officer held that foreign exchange derivative transactions are speculative transaction unless it is proved by the assessee that it was covered ... further held that the assessee did not settled the future contracts but chose to terminate it and, therefore, the loss arising should be a speculation loss. The DRP upheld the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 25. The Ld.AR submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee

Mondelez India Foods P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 5(1)(2), Mumbai

Bench: Vikas Awasthy () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

allowed as business expenditure. The Assessing Officer did not accept the submissions of the assessee and proceeded to treat the loss as a speculative loss. The Assessing Officer held that foreign exchange derivative transactions are speculative transaction unless it is proved by the assessee that it was covered ... further held that the assessee did not settled the future contracts but chose to terminate it and, therefore, the loss arising should be a speculation loss. The DRP upheld the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 25. The Ld.AR submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee