Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/1263/2008 Of The Commissioner Of In...

Itxa/1263/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Pikale Inds..estate, Mumbai

High Court 21 Jan 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/1263/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Pikale Inds..estate, Mumbai
Date of order
21 Jan 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/1263/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax 7, Mumbai v. M/S Pikale Inds..estate, Mumbai, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1263 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income-tax 7 ) Mumbai )..Appellant V/s. M/s.Pikale Inds.Estate Mumbai )..Respondents ---- Mr.Suresh Kumar with Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant. Mr.K.B.Bhujle with Mr.G.S.Pikale i/by S.V.Pikale & Co. for the respondents. ---- Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 21.01.2009. PC 1. Revenue has preferred an appeal on the following questions :- (A) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble I.T.A.T. is right in allowing the set off of long term capital loss despite the colorable device adopted by the assessee to avoid capital gain tax?" (B) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble I.T.A.T.is rightin allowing various expenses aggregating Rs.54,584/- disallowed by the assessing officer and subsequently confirmed by the CIT(A) despite the fact that there was no business activitiesduring the year and the assessee has not been able to substantiate and justify the expenses with any support evidence?" 2. In so far as question-(A) is concerned, the : 2 : Tribunal recorded its finding in paragraphs-8 & 11 of its judgment. The fact that the shares have been sold through Stock Exchange to BSE is a finding recorded by the Tribunal. In the light of that, it cannot be said that this was a colorable device as admittedly the persons who sold the shares were the owners of the shares. 3. In so far as question-(B) is concerned, the question arises from finding of fact. The question as framed therefore, would not arise and consequently, appeal dismissed. (R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation. Full disclaimer & Terms.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan