The Principal Commissioner Ofincome Tax-3, Kolkata v. M/S. Itt Shipping Pvt. Ltd

OD-24 ITAT/289/2018 IA No.GA/1/2018 (Old No.GA/3007/2018) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTASpecial Jurisdiction (Income Tax)ORIGINAL SIDE THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX-3, KOLKATA -Versus- M/S. ITT SHIPPING PVT. LTD. Appearance:Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, Adv....for the appellant. Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, Sr. Adv.Mr. Avra Majumdar, Adv....for the respondent. BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM -And- The Hon’ble JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 17[th] December, 2021. The Court : This appeal filed by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the ‘Act’ in brevity) isdirected against the order dated 1[st] June, 2018 passed by theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Kolkata (the ‘Tribunal’in short) in ITA No.1014/Kol/2017 relating to the assessment year2012-13. The revenue has framed the following substantial questionof law for consideration: (i)Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case,the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred inlaw in holding that the loss on forward contract isallowable for deduction as ordinary business loss insteadof speculation loss upon misrepresentation of provisionsof section 43(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 andInstruction No.3 of 2010 dated 23[rd] March, 2010 issued bythe Central Board of Direct Taxes? We have heard Mr. Smarajit Roychowdhury, learned counselfor the appellant/revenue and Mr. Abhratosh Majumdar, learnedsenior counsel appearing with Mr. Avra Majumdar, learned advocatefor the respondent/assessee. The learned senior counsel for the respondent/assesseehas submitted that though the question of law raised by therevenue is covered in favour of the assessee in several decisions,this appeal cannot be pursued by the revenue on account of low taxeffect. The learned senior counsel has also drawn our attentionto ground no.2 of the memorandum of appeal wherein it has beenstated that overall tax effect involved in this appeal isRs.75,95,580/-. The appellant does not dispute this position.Therefore, this appeal (ITAT/289/2018) stands dismissedon the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, the substantialquestion of law raised is left open. The connected application for stay (IA No.GA/1/2018 OldNo.GA/3007/2018) also stands dismissed. (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.) A/s./S.Das