Case Law Details
The AO as well as the CIT(A) were wrong in coming to a conclusion that the assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s 80-O on the ground that it has only deputed certain personnel for working in the foreign enterprises. Even a promise to render services at a future date would entitle the assessee for deduction u/s 80-O in view of the specific wordings in the section.
When the assessee is not a dealer in foreign exchange and when the transaction is purely incidental to the assessee’s regular course of business the loss would be allowable. It has further been specifically held that foreign exchange cannot be claimed as a commodity in which the assessee was dealing and therefore the transaction did not come within the substantial part of section 43(5) itself.
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
D-BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, AM AND SHRI R.S. PADVEKAR, JM
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
