9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing hearing, at the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri K.A. Vaidyalingan, claimed that the impugned issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs M/s D. Chetan & Company (ITA No.278 of 2014) order dated 01/10/2016 and DIT vs Citibank NA (ITA No.330 of 2013) order dated 11/03/2015. This factual matrix was consented to be correct by the Ld. DR, Miss. Anupama Singla. 2.1. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. In view of the above, we are reproducing hereunder the relevant portion from the order dated 01/10/2016 of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court for ready reference and analysis:- "This appeal under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 27 April 2012, the CIT(Appeals) allowed the Respondent assessee's appeal inter alia relying upon the decisions of Tribunal in Bhavani Gems vs. ACIT and the Special Bench decision in the case of DCIT vs. Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait. The CIT (Appeals) on facts found that the transaction of forward contract was entered into during the course of its business. It held it was not speculative in nature nor was it the case of the Assessing Officer that it was so. Thus the loss incurred as forward contract Incurred as forward contract was allowed as a business loss. 5. Being aggrieved, the Revenue preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The impugned order of the Tribunal upheld the finding of the CIT (Appeals) that the loss incurred by the Respond ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot find that the transaction entered into by the Respondent assessee was speculative in was dismissed by the impugned order of the Tribunal. nature. It further holds that at no point of time did Revenue challenge the assertion of the Respondent assessee that the activity of entering into forward contract was in the regular course of its business only to safeguard against the loss on account of foreign exchange variation. Even before the Tribunal, we find that there was no submission recorded on behalf of the Revenue that the Respondent assessee should be called upon" to explain the nature of its transactions. Thus, the submission now being made is without any foundation as the stand of the assessee on facts was never disputed. So far as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dental to carrying on business of cotton exporter and done to cover up losses on account of differences in foreign exchange valuations, would not be speculative activity but a business activity. 8. In the above view, the question of law, as formulated by the Revenue does not give rise to any substantial of law. Thus, not entertained. 9. The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs." We find that the Hon'ble High Court in the aforesaid case duly considered the decision in Bhavani Gems vs ACIT and special Bench decision in the case of DCIT vs Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait along with the decision, relied upon by the Revenue, in the case of S. Vinodkumar Diamond Pvt. Ltd. vs Addl. CIT rendered on 03/05/2013 and thereafter the decision in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
