2014 (5) TMI 198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Mr Nishant Thakkar ORDER P. C. 1. Heard Mr.Chhotaray, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue. The Revenue is in appeal against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, dated 11.2.2011. The Assessment year in question is 2004-05. The Tribunal disposed of two cross appeals by a common order. 2. Mr.Chhotaray submits that in this case the issue which....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. We are unable to agree because in the facts and circumstances of the case what has emerged is that the assessee company is engaged in the purchase and sale of Government securities, public sector undertaking bonds, commercial papers and other money market instruments. The company approached the Assessing Officer with a case and which has been noted by both, the Assessing Officer and CIT (Ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erest Adjustment Account by the seller. The entire scheme was explained and in terms of RBI guidelines. What has been, thereafter, held by the Assessing Officer is that it is erroneous to assume that it was a provisional arrangement because the loss was not actually incurred. The Tribunal in paragraph (12) of the order under challenge has referred to the fact that the sale of security has definite....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....count under the head 'provision' is loss actually incurred. It is in these circumstances that the Tribunal refused to interfere in the Revenue's appeal. The RBI/s scheme and policy has been referred to. The annual accounts maintained in this case have been referred to. It is in these circumstances that the Tribunal held that the guidelines issued by RBI in repo and reverse repo transac....