<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1962 (4) TMI 123 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</link>
    <description>The article explains that the first proviso to section 24(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 can operate as a substantive rule of business-income computation, not merely as a limitation on inter-head set-off. On that reading, speculative-loss restrictions may apply even where profits and losses fall under the same business head. It also states that genuine forward contracts entered into to hedge business price fluctuations are not speculative transactions. Applying that principle, the forward contract losses were treated as deductible business losses because the contracts were found to be hedging arrangements rather than independent speculative dealings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 14:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=541158" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (4) TMI 123 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</link>
      <description>The article explains that the first proviso to section 24(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 can operate as a substantive rule of business-income computation, not merely as a limitation on inter-head set-off. On that reading, speculative-loss restrictions may apply even where profits and losses fall under the same business head. It also states that genuine forward contracts entered into to hedge business price fluctuations are not speculative transactions. Applying that principle, the forward contract losses were treated as deductible business losses because the contracts were found to be hedging arrangements rather than independent speculative dealings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276379</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>