The Commissioner of Income-tax-­3, Mumbai v. The Paper Products Ltd
[Citation -2017-LL-0724-4]

Citation 2017-LL-0724-4
Appellant Name The Commissioner of Income-tax-­3, Mumbai
Respondent Name The Paper Products Ltd.
Court HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Relevant Act Income-tax
Date of Order 24/07/2017
Assessment Year 2009-10
Judgment View Judgment
Keyword Tags transactions in derivatives • rate of foreign exchange • exchange fluctuation • foreign currency • forward contract • notional loss • actual cost
Bot Summary: Mr.Kotangale, the learned counsel submits that the Tribunal was not justified in allowing the claim of the Assessee on unexplained foreign exchange forward contract as such loss was only notional loss. According to the learned counsel, the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the notional loss on unexplained foreign exchange forward contract was in the nature of stock in trade capable of being valued at cost or market price. It ought to have been considered that the trading in foreign currency was not a main business of the Assessee. According to the learned counsel, notional loss arising in foreign exchange forward contract at the end of financial year was not allowable under the Income Tax Act. 302015 2 The learned counsel for the Respondent supports the Order. 4 The Apex Court has observed that the loss claimed by the Assessee on account of fluctuation in the rate of foreign exchange as on the date of the balance sheet was allowable and the Assessee was entitled for the adjustment of actual cost of imported assets. The loss due to foreign exchange fluctuation in foreign currency transactions in derivatives has to be considered on the last date of accounting year and it is deductible under Section 37(1) of the Act.


IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDITION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.30 OF 2015 Commissioner of Income Tax 3, Mumbai ... Appellant V/s. Paper Products Ltd. ... Respondent ..... Mr.Ashok Kotangle with Ms.Padma Divakar, Advocate for Appellant. Mr.K.Gopal with Mr.Jitendra Singh, Advocate for Respondent. .... CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA & A.M.BADAR JJ. DATED : 24th July 2017. P.C. 1 Appeal pertains to Assessment year 2009 10. Mr.Kotangale, learned counsel submits that Tribunal was not justified in allowing claim of Assessee on unexplained foreign exchange forward contract as such loss was only notional loss. According to learned counsel, Tribunal was not justified in holding that notional loss on unexplained foreign exchange forward contract was in nature of stock in trade capable of being valued at cost or market price. It ought to have been considered that trading in foreign currency was not main business of Assessee. According to learned counsel, notional loss arising in foreign exchange forward contract at end of financial year was not allowable under Income Tax Act. Gaikwad RD 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2017 10:10:08 ::: (42)ITXANo.302015 2 learned counsel for Respondent supports Order. 3 Tribunal while deciding Appeal has relied on Judgment of Apex Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. Woodward Governor India (P.) Ltd. reported in (2009) 312 ITR 254. 4 Apex Court has observed that loss claimed by Assessee on account of fluctuation in rate of foreign exchange as on date of balance sheet was allowable and Assessee was entitled for adjustment of actual cost of imported assets. loss due to foreign exchange fluctuation in foreign currency transactions in derivatives has to be considered on last date of accounting year and it is deductible under Section 37(1) of Act. 5 Considering above, no error has been committed by Tribunal in applying Judgment of Apex Court in Woodward Governor India (P.) Ltd (referred to supra). 6 In light of above, no substantial question arises. Appeal is dismissed. No costs. ( A.M.BADAR J.) ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA J.) Gaikwad RD 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 25/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 26/07/2017 10:10:08 ::: TheCommissionerofIncome-tax-3,Mumbai v. ThePaperProductsLtd
Report Error