Itxa/618/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3 Mumbai v. Metmin Finance And Holdings Pvt. Ltd
High Court
24 Jan 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/618/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3 Mumbai v. Metmin Finance And Holdings Pvt. Ltd
Date of order
24 Jan 2011
Assessment year(s)
2002-2003, 2003-2004
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In Itxa/618/2011 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 3 Mumbai v. Metmin Finance And Holdings Pvt. Ltd, the High Court (2011) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: The question raised in this Appeal is "whether Tribunal was justified in allowing a set off of speculation of loss for the A.Y.
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 BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.831 OF 2010
The Commissioner of Income Tax-3 MumbaiV/s.Metmin Finance and Holdings Pvt. Ltd.,
..... Appellants
..... Respondents
----
Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellants.None for the respondents.
----
CORAM : J.P.DEVADHAR & MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ.
DATE :24/1/ 2011
P.C.
1.Objections waived. Taken up for admission. The question raised in this Appeal is "whether Tribunal was justified in allowing a set off of speculation of loss for the A.Y. 2002-2003 against the business profit for A.Y. 2003-2004 being A.Y. In question in the appeal.
2The finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal in paragraph-5 of the judgment is that the transactions entered into by the assessee for the A.Y.2002-2003 as well as A.Y. 2003-2004 are similar and therefore, once the
loss incurred in the A.Y. 2002-2003 is accepted as speculation loss, then the profits earned during A.Y. 2003-2004 from similar transactions would have to be considered as speculation profits. In this view of the matter, the decision of the Tribunal that the profits earned in A.Y. 2003-2004 are not business profits but speculation profits is based on finding of fact. No question of law arises from the decision of the Tribunal. Appeal is dismissed.
(MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR,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.