9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 34X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elying M2M loss on SWAP contract was allowable where loans were converted into foreign currency loan to take benefit of low interest rate and loss recognized on account of foreign exchange fluctuation as per notified Accounting Standard 11 was an accrued and subsisting liability and not merely a contingent or hypothetical liability. DR, on the other hand, has not been able to cite any judicial pronouncement in support of the Revenue s case on this issue. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the CIT(A) allowing the claim of the assessee for deduction on account of Mark-to Market Exchange Loss in respect of Foreign Currency Derivatives Contracts and upholding the same, we dismiss of the Revenue s appeal. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 91,91,13,146/- by holding that notional loss cannot be allowed as deduction while calculating the income under the head business and profession. 6. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT(A) who deleted the disallowance made by the AO by observing as under: 5.7 It is observed that facts for the year under consideration continued to remain ) same and disallowance of swap contract loss mainly pertains to ECB transactions which / was considered by my predecessor C1T(A) in his order referred supra. He has also considered CBDT instruction 3/2010 relied upon by AO and various decisions of ITATs and High court including jurisdictional ITAT and Hon'ble Gujarat High court decisions relied upon by appellant. During the course of appellate hearings, ARs of the appellant have referred to decision of Hon'ble Ahmedabad ITAT in one of its group entity being Adani Enterprise limited in ITAno. 1840, 3321 and 2305/Ahd/15 dated 12/02/2019 has decided similar issue in favour of assessee and held as under; "11. So far this grievance of the assessee is concerned, the relevant material facts are as follows. During the course of scrutiny assessment proceedings, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance." 14. On a similar note, bill with a little more detailed analysis, another coordinate bench of the Tribunal, in the case of Suzlon Energy Ltd Vs ACIT [(2017) 81 taxmann.190 (AM)], has observed as follows: "8. In the present cane also, the assessee is consistently following the mercantile method of accounting, the same accounting treatment for the foreign exchange losses and gains has been given by the assessee all along, the assessee is making entries in respect of such losses and gains, and the treatment is consistent with the Accounting Standards. As a matter of fact, the Assessing Officer has not even raised any issues with respect to the above His case is confined to the lass being notional in nature anil contrary to the CBDT guidelines. As for the CBDT instructions, it is only elementary Unit any instructions issued by the CBDT cannot bind the assessee even though the assessee is entitled to, and can legitimately ask for, any benefits granted to the assessee by such instructions or circulars. Nothing, therefore, tarns on the CBDT Instruction even if it is actually contrary to the claim of the assessee. 9. We have also noted that, as per the details filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rted the order of the AO by reiterating the findings contained in the assessment order. On the other hand the learned AR before us filed a paper book running from pages 1 to 53 and inter alia contended that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the order of the ITAT in the group case. The ld. AR vehemently supported the order of the ld. CITA. 9. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. At the outset, we note that identical issue came up before this tribunal in case of sister concern of the assessee namely Adani Petronet (Dahej) Port Pvt. Ltd for A.Y. 2011-12 in ITA No. 1470/AHD/2018 where the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The relevant finding of the bench is extracted as under: 8.5 We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. The learned DR in support of the Revenue's case on this issue has mainly relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. The learned Counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, has contended that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the various j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n record by the Revenue to demonstrate that the decision of Tribunal as discussed above has been set aside / stayed or overruled by the Higher Judicial Authorities. Before us, Revenue has not placed any material on record to point out any distinguishing feature in the facts & circumstances of the case of the assessee and fact & circumstances in case of sister concern nor has placed any contrary binding decision in its support. Thus, respectfully following the order this tribunal in the case as discussed above, we uphold the finding of the learned CIT(A). Thus, the ground of appeal raised by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. 9.2 In the Result appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed. Coming to ITA No 283/Ahd/2020 an appeal by the Revenue for A.Y. 2016-17 10. The only issue raised by the Revenue is that the learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance made by the AO of Mark to market loss of Rs. 25,45,18,097/- only. 11. At the outset we note that the issue raised by the revenue in its grounds of appeal for the AY 2016-17 is identical to the issues raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 242/AHD/2020 for the assessment year 2015-16. Therefore, the findings given in ITA No. 242/AHD ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
