Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/128/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/128/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax City-19, Mumbai v. M/S. S. D. Investments And Trading Co

High Court 01 Apr 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/128/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax City-19, Mumbai v. M/S. S. D. Investments And Trading Co
Date of order
01 Apr 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In Itxa/128/2005 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax City-19, Mumbai v. M/S. S. D. Investments And Trading Co, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: In view of the order passed today in Income Tax Appeal No.129 of 2005, where similar issue has been raised and for the same reasons recorded therein, this appeal also stands dismissed with no order as to costs.

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 ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.128 OF 2005 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.128 OF 2005 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.S.D.Investment & Trading Co. ..Respondent. Mr.R.Ashokan for appellant. Mr.Ramesh C.Sahu i/b. S.K.Shrivastav & Co. for respondent. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.DATED : 1ST APRIL, 2008. CORAM : DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 1ST APRIL, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. In the above appeal, the revenue is seeking to raise the following substantial questions of law:- " Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal is right in holding that the notional interest should not be charged in spite of the fact that the borrowed funds were utilized for non business purposes ? 2. The relevant assessment year is 1998-99. 3. In view of the order passed today in Income Tax Appeal No.129 of 2005, where similar issue has been raised and for the same reasons recorded therein, this appeal also stands dismissed with no order as to costs. (DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN) (DR. S.RADHAKRISHNAN) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (J.P. DEVADHAR, 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