https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350316 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's appeal and allowing the cross-objection by the assessee. It held that the foreign exchange fluctuation loss was a business expenditure, not speculative, under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. Additionally, the Tribunal agreed that the loss crystallized in the relevant year due to the settlement with ICICI Bank, making it allowable for that year. The decision was based on precedents and the integral nature of hedging transactions to the assessee's export business. en-us Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Nov 2017 11:50:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350316 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, dismissing the revenue's appeal and allowing the cross-objection by the assessee. It held that the foreign exchange fluctuation loss was a business expenditure, not speculative, under Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act. Additionally, the Tribunal agreed that the loss crystallized in the relevant year due to the settlement with ICICI Bank, making it allowable for that year. The decision was based on precedents and the integral nature of hedging transactions to the assessee's export business. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 11 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350316