Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that the forward contracts were entered into by the assessee to hedge against foreign exchange fluctuations resulting from inflows and outflows in respect of the underlying contracts for provisions of consultancy and project management. Concededly, the assessee did not deal in foreign exchange. Tribunal held that the loss, on account of forward contracts could not be considered as speculative and that the Assessing Officer had erred in disallowing it were not erroneous. Followed CIT   v. Woodward Governor India Pvt. Ltd (2009) 312 ITR 254(SC) (AY. 2009-10).