Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (11) TMI 1804 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of Mark to Market Loss claimed by the assessee in derivative transactions - whether loss claimed on the basis of value of derivative as on 31st March is merely a notional loss and the actual loss or the profit in respect of such derivative transactions would get crystallized only at the time of settlement of such transaction? - CIT-A allowed the claim - HELD THAT:- We noticed that the claim of the assessee has duly covered by the assessee’s own case [2012 (3) TMI 612 - ITAT MUMBA] in which the claim of the assessee has been allowed. The other law mentioned above and relied upon by the CIT(A) also speaks about allowance by claim of the assessee. Since, the issue in question has duly been covered by the above mentioned cases. Therefore, we are of the view that the finding of the CIT(A) is quite correct and is not liable to be interfere with - Decided against the revenue. Addition u/s 14A - assessee earned the exempt income in the Form of dividend on shares/MF/debentures held stock exchanged - HELD THAT:- The case of Devkant Synthetics (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO-3(1)(2) [2015 (11) TMI 1067 - ITAT MUMBAI] in which it is specifically held that where the investment was held as stock in trade then the provision u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D of the Act was not applicable. This issue has also been decided in favour of Assessee by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. India Advantages Securities Ltd. [2015 (6) TMI 140 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2016 (3) TMI 755 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. The provision of Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of the Act was not applicable upon the investment held as stock and trade. The assessee himself assessed the expenses to the earned the exempt income 1,98,491/-. The CIT(A) has restricted the expenses to the extent only. In the said circumstances, we are of the view that the CIT(A) has passed the order judiciously and correctly which is not required to interfere with - Decided against the revenue.
|