← All Phrases

“speculative transaction”

Losses & Set-offSection 43(5)Section 43(5)255 judgments

The decision most relied on for speculative transaction is CIT v. Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd. (261 ITR 256), cited in 114 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on speculative transaction

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. Punjab Stainless Steel Industries
364 ITR 144 · 2014 · Supreme Court
59
citing judgments

The Supreme Court holds that ICAI Guidance Notes and accounting methods prescribed by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) can be relied upon for computing "turnover," especially for tax audit purposes under Section 44AB and for transactions involving shares and derivatives.

CIT v. Soorajmull Nagarmull
129 ITR 169 · 1981 · High Court
55
citing judgments

Losses from foreign exchange forward contracts, when incidental to an assessee's regular business and undertaken to safeguard business interests, are treated as business losses and not speculative losses under section 43(5).

CIT v. Concord Commercial Pvt. Ltd.
95 ITD 117 · 2005 · ITAT
34
citing judgments

The aggregate of business profits and losses from derivative transactions must be worked out before applying the Explanation to Section 73 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. This means that trading of shares and derivative transactions are not considered speculative transactions under Section 43(5) for the purposes of Sections 28 to 41.

CIT v. Darshan Securities (P) Ltd.
341 ITR 556 · 2012 · High Court
27
citing judgments

A company involved in the purchase and sale of shares is deemed to be carrying on a speculative business to the extent of such transactions, unless it falls under an exception to Section 73 of the Income Tax Act.

Pankaj Oil Mills v. CIT
115 ITR 824 · 1978 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Hedging contracts related to raw materials for manufacturers are excluded from speculative transactions under Section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act, even if they involve both sales and purchases and are entered into at different times from the delivery of goods.

CIT v. Trishul Investments Ltd.
305 ITR 434 · 2008 · High Court
26
citing judgments

Interest paid on loans borrowed for the purpose of investment in shares is allowed as part of the cost of acquisition eligible for deduction while computing capital gains under Section 48. The intention of the assessee at the time of acquisition of shares determines the nature of the gain.

Quality Engineering & Software Technologies (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT
52 Taxmann.com 515 · 2014 · ITAT
26
citing judgments

A forward contract entered into to protect against foreign currency fluctuations on consideration receivable for exports is not a speculative transaction, and provisions for losses on such derivative contracts are allowable expenditures.

Judgments citing speculative transaction

Anil Kumar Agarwal, Agra vs. DCIT 2(1)(1), Agra

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 101/AGR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Agra19 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Anil Kumar Agarwal, Vs. Dy. Cit, 44, R. S. Residency, Circle-2(1)(1), Dayal Bagh, Agra, Up Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aampa3335J Assessee By : Shri Rajni Kant Verma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri Rajni Kant Verma, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

lakhs in cash from Smt Gashkin Begum on sale of property. The assessee also submitted that he had earned income from speculative transactions and the same were duly offered to tax. The assessee submitted that he had received monies from Adroid Securities

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

Thus in view of above, I do not 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 ... According to the ld. AO that 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

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)

gain on forward contract for not hedging contracts and therefore, held to be speculative in nature. In view of the specific provisions of the speculative transactions u/s 43(5) of the Act, the above stated gain was held to be Speculative gain. 5. In the subsequent appeal, the ld.CIT ... incidental to the assessee's business of manufacture and export of fruit pulp and allied products and therefore, in our view, do not represent speculative transactions. Therefore, the concept of delivery and non- delivery thereof is of no consequence and is irrelevant in the context of the facts

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

being of the view that there was no 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 ... material. The dispute is confined to whether these transactions fall on one side or the other of the statutory line dividing business transactions from speculative transactions. Where complete disclosure has been made and the issue is essentially one of legal characterisation of an admitted claim, the assessee's explanation cannot

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

exchanges were integral part and incidental to the core business of the export of rice and these transactions should constitute ‘hedging transactions’ and not speculative transactions and duly covered u/s 43(5) of the Act and are eligible transactions as per Section 45(3) of the Act read with proviso ... 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 to hedge the export/import transactions against future currency exchange

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)

exceptions carved out to Section 43(5) of the Act. The consequential effect would be that such CDT are outside the ambit of expression ‘Speculative transaction’ are thus non speculative in nature. Hence loss arising from such CDT being ordinary loss are eligible for set off against the profits arising ... lower authorities have misdirected themselves in law in denying the relief towards set off and carry forward for loss arising from such non speculative transaction. 6. Section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act defines ‘speculative transaction’. As per the Scheme of the Act, a transaction of speculative nature carries

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)

lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions have been treated as business transactions when some conditions are satisfied. The assessee‟s argument that it is doing arbitrage with respect to F&O cuts ... speculative. That in another part of the statute, which deals with computation of business income, derivatives are excluded from the definition of speculative transactions, only underlines that such exclusion is limited for the purpose of those provisions or section. To borrow the Madras High Court‟s expression, (a) derivatives

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)

lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions have been treated as business transactions when some conditions are satisfied. The assessee‟s argument that it is doing arbitrage with respect to F&O cuts ... speculative. That in another part of the statute, which deals with computation of business income, derivatives are excluded from the definition of speculative transactions, only underlines that such exclusion is limited for the purpose of those provisions or section. To borrow the Madras High Court‟s expression, (a) derivatives

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)

lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions have been treated as business transactions when some conditions are satisfied. The assessee‟s argument that it is doing arbitrage with respect to F&O cuts ... speculative. That in another part of the statute, which deals with computation of business income, derivatives are excluded from the definition of speculative transactions, only underlines that such exclusion is limited for the purpose of those provisions or section. To borrow the Madras High Court‟s expression, (a) derivatives

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)

lists out the circumstances in which certain transactions are to be treated as speculation and also the case where such speculation transactions have been treated as business transactions when some conditions are satisfied. The assessee‟s argument that it is doing arbitrage with respect to F&O cuts ... speculative. That in another part of the statute, which deals with computation of business income, derivatives are excluded from the definition of speculative transactions, only underlines that such exclusion is limited for the purpose of those provisions or section. To borrow the Madras High Court‟s expression, (a) derivatives

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

assessee came up with the plea that as per amendment in section 43(5) of the Act, w.e.f.1.4.2006, the subject transactions were no more speculative transactions and rather same were normal business transactions, and as such, said loss being normal business loss, could be set off against income from other ... source. Accordingly, the assessee claimed that said loss be not treated as speculative transaction loss, and he was entitled to set off the same income from house property and other sources income of Rs. 13,62,692/-. 5 Nirmal Kumar Dugar, Jaipur While submitting turnover details of transactions, the assessee

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax - 7(1)(1), Mumbai, Maharashtra vs. Master Chain Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, Maharashtra

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 5397/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor a/w Ms. SoumyaFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik (SR DR)
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

match because these entries have not been booked on the day when the purchase has been made. Rather Sh. Parvinder Singh has engaged into speculation transaction with M/s Master Chains Pvt Ltd and he is booking the entry after few days time on a different rate. 4.6.1.4. In order ... other corresponding evidence available or provided by the assessee which corroborates with the explanation given by Sh. Parvinder Singh that these are speculative transactions. It is already proven in other Issues pertaining to the assessees that they are involved in unaccounted purchases and unaccounted sales. Hence, the transactions written

Rajesh Bubna, Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle- 20, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1424/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 69A

Rajesh Bubna vs. ACIT of the Act, in reply whereof it was stated by the assessee that this cash was accumulated from the speculative transactions carried on by him of food grains, pluses, wheat, oil etc. and offered the same for tax as current year’s business income. The relevant ... further submits that the assessee has failed to produce any information such as demat account, details of the platform and interface through which such speculation transactions in commodity market were carried out and further failed to file any other documentary evidence to establish his contention w.r.t. speculation transaction. He thus

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

outstanding receivables denominated in USD amounting to Rs 88,83,314/-. The 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 ... foreign exchange depending upon the prevailing USD-JPY exchange rate with reference to base rate. Therefore the transaction is held to be a speculative transaction & loss arising there from is held to be a speculation loss & accordingly disallowed. The assessee has relied on various case laws. The relevant extracts from

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

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 the same cannot be adjusted against the normal

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)

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 stocks and shares, is periodically or ultimately settled otherwise

Pico Capital Private Limited (Successor in Interest of M/S Western India Garments Private Limited ), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-8(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4007/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)

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 stocks and shares, is periodically or ultimately settled otherwise

ITO, Ward-17(1), New Delhi, Delhi vs. Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Delhi

ITA 43/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

Section 143(3)Section 69A

proceedings has taken on record the assessee’s supportive evidence including the relevant contract notes etc. thereby proving the above loss as a not speculative transaction under section 43(5) of the Act. That being the case, we hereby reject the Revenue’s instant third substantive ground as well

Pawan Kumar Agarwal, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-36(1), New Delhi

ITA 3658/DEL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Acit, Sh. Pawan Kumar Agarwal, A-4/2, Rana Pratap Bagh, Circle-36(1), New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Adupa9815A (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2016-17 Vs. Sh. Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Ito, Ward-17(1), A-4/2, Rana Pratap Bagh, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Adupa9815A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Satish Agarwal, Ca Ms. Anju Sharma, Ca Department By Sh. Jitender Singh, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 20.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 22.09.2025 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm These Assessee’S & Revenue’S Cross Appeals

Section 143(3)Section 69A

proceedings has taken on record the assessee’s supportive evidence including the relevant contract notes etc. thereby proving the above loss as a not speculative transaction under section 43(5) of the Act. That being the case, we hereby reject the Revenue’s instant third substantive ground as well

Dinesh Kumar Tak, Beawar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Beawar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is Partly allowed

ITA 981/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Porwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

claim the difference in price, if ultimately the contract is settled otherwise than by actual delivery or transfer of the commodity, it is a speculative transaction (Juvvi Subbaramaiah & Co. V. CIT (1964) 51 ITR 742 (A.P.). (d) Futures contracts – Transactions in futures contracts like transactions in stock and shares when ... settled otherwise than by actual delivery would be speculative transactions u/sec. 43(5), (CIT V. Shri Bharat R. Ruia (HUF) (2011) 10 taxmann.com 265/199 taxman 87 (Bom.)" Thus when it is a case of “DERIVATIVES” “F & O TRASNACTIONS” on sale / purchase of shares on Bolt; it is Margin (+) or (-) which