https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778095 ITAT, Delhi (AT) partly allowed the assessee's appeals. It directed the AO to reduce an inadvertently offered additional income of Rs.1.14 crore from AY 2010-11 (previously offered in AY 2009-10) to avoid double taxation and upheld the assessed income figure. Losses on forward commodity contracts were allowed as business expenditure under s.37(1) (not speculative). Additions for loan-processing charges and foreign-currency hedging premium, deleted by CIT(A), were affirmed. Revenue's grounds challenging those deletions were dismissed; the assessee's grounds regarding double addition and forward-contract losses were allowed. en-us Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778095 ITAT, Delhi (AT) partly allowed the assessee's appeals. It directed the AO to reduce an inadvertently offered additional income of Rs.1.14 crore from AY 2010-11 (previously offered in AY 2009-10) to avoid double taxation and upheld the assessed income figure. Losses on forward commodity contracts were allowed as business expenditure under s.37(1) (not speculative). Additions for loan-processing charges and foreign-currency hedging premium, deleted by CIT(A), were affirmed. Revenue's grounds challenging those deletions were dismissed; the assessee's grounds regarding double addition and forward-contract losses were allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 29 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778095