Case LawHigh Court › Itxa/414/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Inc...

Itxa/414/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-16 v. M/S. Ratnadeep Impex

High Court 18 Jul 2017 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/414/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-16 v. M/S. Ratnadeep Impex
Date of order
18 Jul 2017
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Itxa/414/2015 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-16 v. M/S. Ratnadeep Impex, the High Court (2017) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.

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 JURISDITION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.414 OF 2015 The Commissioner of Income-Tax-16...AppellantV/s.M/s.Ratnadeep Impex...Respondent ..... Mr.A.R.Malhotra with Mr.N.A.Kazi, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms.Arati Vissanji with Mr.S.P.Mehta, Advocate for the Respondent..... CORAM :S.V.GANGAPURWALA &A.M.BADAR JJ. DATED :18[th] July 2017. P.C. 1The present Appeal pertains to Assessment year 2007-08. Mr.Malhotra, the learned counsel for the Appellant submitsthat, the Tribunal was not right in deleting the addition ofRs.62,67,308/- sustained by the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) on account of dis-allowance of loss on foreign exchangeforward contract loss. The said loss was notional loss and hence,cannot be allowed. The learned counsel submits that the Tribunalhas not properly appreciated the Judgment referred in the Order.The learned counsel for the Respondent submits that similar issuehas been considered by this Court in Income-Tax Appeal No.278 of 2014 and the same is disposed of on 1[st] October 2016 against theRevenue. 2We have gone through the Judgment and Order of theIncome-Tax Appeal No.278 of 2014 dated 1[st] October 2014. Theinvolved therein was similar as one raised in the present Appeal. 3For the reasons stated in the Judgment and Order ofthis Court in Income-Tax Appeal No.278 of 2014, the presentAppeal stands dismissed. No costs. ( A.M.BADAR J.) ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA 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