The Cit Mumbai City-Iv v. M/S.colgate Palmolive (India)Ltd
High Court
04 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Cit Mumbai City-Iv v. M/S.colgate Palmolive (India)Ltd
Date of order
04 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Cit Mumbai City-Iv v. M/S.colgate Palmolive (India)Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: Appeal was preferred on the following question of law :- "Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in confirming the order of CIT(A) and holding that the loss of Rs.43,23,486/- on sale of units was a short term capital loss and not speculation loss ?
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.115 OF 2001
The CIT Mumbai City-IV ..Appellant
Versus
M/s.Colgate Palmolive (India)Ltd.,..Respondent
----
Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for the appellant.
Mr.R.Murlidharan with Mr.Nishita Doshi i/by
M/s.C.Bayley & Co. for the respondent.
----
Coram : F.I.Rebello & R.S.Mohite,JJ
Coram : F.I.Rebello &
R.S.Mohite,JJ
Date : 4.2.2008
PC
1. Appeal was preferred on the following question
of law :-
"Whether on facts and in the circumstances
of the case, the Tribunal was justified in
law in confirming the order of CIT(A) and
holding that the loss of Rs.43,23,486/- on
sale of units was a short term capital
loss and not speculation loss ?
2. In our opinion, the question is squarely covered
by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Apollo TyresLtd., V/s. CIT reported in 255 ITR 273 in favour of
the assessee.
3. In the light of the above, appeal dismissed.
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,J)
(R.S.Mohite,J) (F.I.Rebello,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.