Case LawHigh Court › Mumbai City, Iv v. M/S. Raymond Woolen M...

Mumbai City, Iv v. M/S. Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd

High Court 11 Dec 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Mumbai City, Iv v. M/S. Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd
Date of order
11 Dec 2007
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Mumbai City, Iv v. M/S. Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd, the High Court (2007) dismissed the appeal.

Decision: Considering that the subject matter is the same and as the appeal by the Revenue against the order in favour of the assesse has been dismissed, nothing survives in this appeal and is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Income Tax Appeal No.266 of 2001. The Commissioner of Income Tax, ..Appellant Mumbai City, IV versus M/s. Raymond Woolen Mills Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.B.M.Chatterjee with Ms. P.P.Bhosale & Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellant Mr. Percy Pardiwala with Mr.Mohan Salian & Mr. B. Das i/b. Gagrat & Co for the respondent Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite, JJ. R.S.Mohite, JJ. Dated : 11th Dec., 2007 Dated : 11th Dec., 2007 P.C. 1. The question of law is as framed in para 5 of the appeal memo. Revenue had preferred Income Tax Appeal No.960/2000 in respect of the Order arising from the appeal filed by the assessee for the Assessment year 1985-86. That appeal was dismissed by order dated 21.6.2005. 2. Revenue had also preferred an appeal for the assessment year 1985-86. Tribunal noted that considering the orders in favour of the assessee for the earlier assessment years, the appeal preferred by the Revenue is to be dismissed and accordingly dismissed the same by order dated 13.12.2000. This -2- appeal is preferred in respect of the said order. 3. Considering that the subject matter is the same and as the appeal by the Revenue against the order in favour of the assesse has been dismissed, nothing survives in this appeal and is accordingly dismissed. J.) (F.I.Rebello,J.) (F.I.Rebello, (F.I.Rebello, (R.S.Mohite, J.) (R.S.Mohite, 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