TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (4) TMI 1691
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....count of Interest on loan to Sun Pharma Global Inc (AE) at London Inter Bank Offer Rate (LIBOR) Plus 2% Rate =7.401% which is almos equal to the Prime Lending Rate or American Bank lending rate? 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified directing the AO to restrict the entire transfer pricing adjustment of Rs. 12,55,719/- made by it on account of Interest on short term advances to Sim Pharmaceuticals U.K.Ltd., Sun Pharmaceuticals Ltd., and Sun Pharmaceuticals Peru SAC (Aes) at London Inter Bank Offer Rate (LIBOR) Plus 0.25%=5.651% instead of LIBOR Plus 2% Rate =7.401% which is almost equal to the Prime Lending Rate or American Bank Lending Rate? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ied in directing the Assessing Officer to consider Foreign Exchange Fluctuation Gain of Rs. 14,33,80,289/- on account of cancellation/renewal of forward contracts made by the assessee to protect the risk of investments in its subsidiary companies as capital receipts?" 3. Insofar as question No. (1) is concerned, broadly stated, it appears from the record that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for and on behalf of M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, partnership firm of which he is a partner, is a subject matter of dispute at the hands of the Revenue. The assessee contends that such expenditure is in the nature of his business expenditure and therefore, allowable under section 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessing Officer reje....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Therefore, this question is not entertained in the present Tax Appeal making it clear that the corresponding question of applicability or otherwise of section 37 of the Act raised by the Revenue in Tax Appeal No. 312 of 2018 would be debated independently. 6. So far as question (2) is concerned, it pertains to taxing of gain arising out foreign exchange fluctuation gain of Rs. 14.33 crores (rounded off). This has two parameters. The facts on record would suggest that the assessee had entered into forward contracts to safeguard the value of investments fluctuation. The assessee had treated such foreign exchange rate gain as capital receipt. The Assessing Officer, however, is of the opinion that the same should be treated as Revenue receip....