Hedging loss and accrued gratuity deduction turn on nexus with business and ascertainable liability.

Forward transactions qualify as hedging only where the contract is in raw materials or merchandise directly linked to the assessee's manufacturing or trading business and is entered into to protect against price fluctuations; dealings in matra were treated as speculative because they lacked that direct nexus, so the loss was not deductible against business profits. Gratuity amounts transferred to an Employees' Gratuity Fund were deductible on accrual under the mercantile system because the liability had accrued with service, was sufficiently ascertainable, and had been irrevocably credited, making it a revenue expenditure rather than a contingent reserve.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the loss from forward transactions in matra was allowable as a hedging transaction and deductible against business profits; (ii) Whether the gratuity amounts transferred to the Employees' Gratuity Fund were deductible as business expenditure on accrual basis.

Issue (i): Whether the loss from forward transactions in matra was allowable as a hedging transaction and deductible against business profits.

Analysis: The proviso to Explanation 2 of section 24(1) protects only contracts in respect of raw materials or merchandise that have a direct nexus with the goods manufactured or sold by the assessee and are entered into to guard against loss from future price fluctuations. The forward dealings in matra were not in the same raw material used in the assessee's manufacturing business of atta and wheat products, nor were they in connected commodities for the purpose of the proviso. The transactions were therefore speculative and the loss could not be set off against business profits.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the negative, against the assessee and in favour of the revenue.

Issue (ii): Whether the gratuity amounts transferred to the Employees' Gratuity Fund were deductible as business expenditure on accrual basis.

Analysis: Under the mercantile system, expenditure is allowable when a legal liability has accrued, even if payment is deferred. The gratuity scheme created an enforceable liability accruing with each year of service, and the liability was sufficiently ascertainable. The amounts were irrevocably transferred and credited to the employees' accounts, distinguishing the case from a mere reserve or an uncertain, contingent appropriation. The liability was therefore a revenue outgo deductible in computing business income.

Conclusion: The question was answered in the negative, against the revenue and in favour of the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The reference was disposed of by rejecting the claim to set off the speculative loss, while allowing deduction of the gratuity provisions as business expenditure, leaving the assessee successful only in part.

Ratio Decidendi: A forward contract qualifies for the hedging exception only when the raw material or merchandise is directly connected with the assessee's manufacturing or merchanting business, and under the mercantile system an ascertained and accrued gratuity liability is deductible as revenue expenditure even if payment is deferred.

---