In Itxa/3325/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 5 Mumbai v. Cadbury India Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
sas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.3325 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-5, Mumbai
..Appellant.
V/s.
M/s. Cadbury India Ltd.
..Respondent.
Ms. Suchitra Kamble for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A.SAYED, JJ.
DATED : 22ND JULY, 2011
P.C. :-
Counsel for the revenue states that the question raised in this appeal is covered against the revenue by the decision of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. ACE Builders P. Ltd. reported in [2006] 281 ITR 210 (Bom). The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
(A.A. SAYED, 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.
EaseValue