Itxa/258/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S Swiss Properties Ltd
High Court
07 Aug 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/258/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S Swiss Properties Ltd
Date of order
07 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
Case summary
In Itxa/258/2008 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3, Mumbai v. M/S Swiss Properties Ltd, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.
Decision: Hence, the appeals are rejected.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
O.O.C.J.
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.258 OF 2008
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.288 OF 2008
-----------------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office
Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s
appearances, Court’s orders
order or directions
-----------------------------------------------------
¦ Mr.Vimal Gupta for the Appellant.
¦ Mr.R.F.Kanga i/b D.A.K.Jasani for
¦ the Respondent.
¦
¦ CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH &
¦ J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
¦ DATED:7TH AUGUST, 2008
P.C.:
Heard the learned Counsel for both
sides. There is a clear finding
recorded that the entire interest
income earned by the Respondent is
the income from business. In view
of the judgment of the Division
Bench of the Bombay High Court in
the case of Commissioner of
Income-tax v/s. Paramount Premises
(P) Ltd. 190 ITR 259 and the
judgment of theSupreme Court in the
- 2 -
case of Commissioner of Income-tax
v/s. Bokaro Steel Ltd., 236 ITR
315, the learned Counsel for the
Appellant was not justified in
placing reliance on the judgment of
the Supreme Court in the case of
Tuticorin Alkalies & Chemicals Ltd.,
227 ITR 172.
In our opinion, in view of the
reasons given in the judgment of the
tribunal, specially paragraphs 6 & 7
thereof, no question of law arises.
Hence, the appeals are rejected.
(D.K.DESHMUKH, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)
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.