https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25812 The Court held in favor of the assessee, ruling that the loss incurred in local purchase transactions was non-speculative as they were hedging contracts to guard against price fluctuations. Additionally, the offers made to foreign customers, even if not accepted, were considered as contracts for the proviso to section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court emphasized that the overall transaction process should be considered, and multiple contracts for actual delivery were encompassed under the proviso. Consequently, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the proviso, and the local purchases were not speculative contracts. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:53:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25812 The Court held in favor of the assessee, ruling that the loss incurred in local purchase transactions was non-speculative as they were hedging contracts to guard against price fluctuations. Additionally, the offers made to foreign customers, even if not accepted, were considered as contracts for the proviso to section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Court emphasized that the overall transaction process should be considered, and multiple contracts for actual delivery were encompassed under the proviso. Consequently, the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the proviso, and the local purchases were not speculative contracts. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25812