Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/3025/2010 Of The Commissionr Of Inc...

Itxa/3025/2010 Of The Commissionr Of Income-Tax,Mum v. M/S Mafatlal Industries Ltd

High Court 14 Oct 2008 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/3025/2010 Of The Commissionr Of Income-Tax,Mum v. M/S Mafatlal Industries Ltd
Date of order
14 Oct 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In Itxa/3025/2010 Of The Commissionr Of Income-Tax,Mum v. M/S Mafatlal Industries Ltd, the High Court (2008) decided the matter.

Issue: Although four questions of law are raised by the revenue, the learned counsel for the revenue pressed only one question viz. whether the tribunal was justified in allowing deduction of the expenditure of Rs.12,53,282/- as sales promotion expenses.

Decision: Hence, the appeal is rejected.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

AGK IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY AGK ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.839 OF 2004 The Commissioner of Income-tax ..Appellant. V/s. M/s.Mafatlal Industries Limited ..Respondent. Mr.J.S. Salyuja for the Appellant. Ms.V.B. Patel for the Respondent. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 14TH OCTOBER, 2008. P.C. : 1. Although four questions of law are raised by the revenue, the learned counsel for the revenue pressed only one question viz. whether the tribunal was justified in allowing deduction of the expenditure of Rs.12,53,282/- as sales promotion expenses. 2. In the present case, the assessee had reimbursed the expenditure incurred by Tootals Textiles Limited, U.K. for carrying out survey and submitting a report for promotion of the products manufactured by the assessee in certain Middle East countries. The finding recorded by the tribunal is that the survey pertains to the existing products of the assessee and so the expenditure pertaining thereto are allowable expenses. The decision of the tribunal is based on pure finding of fact and no question of law arises from the order of the tribunal. Hence, the appeal is rejected. D.K. DESHMUKH, 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