Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the High Court held that market loss of stock in trade as ascertained liability so long as it was not a case of speculative transaction and the loss incurred was of forward contract in the regular course of business, the loss incurred should be allowed as business loss and that the Tribunal was justified in holding that marked-to-market loss on open equity stock future contracts and marked-to-market loss on interest rate swaps was an ascertained loss and in upholding the valuation of marked-to-market loss on March 31 in respect of future contract held as closing stock-in-trade. ITAT has relied on  United Commercial Bank v. CIT (1999)8 SCC  338/ 106 taxman 601/ 240 ITR 355 (SC). Held, dismissing the SLP   that considering the reasoning of both forums and the High Court judgment, there was no infirmity and no interference was called for.