Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.lloyds Steel Industries Limited

High Court 22 Jan 2010 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.lloyds Steel Industries Limited
Date of order
22 Jan 2010
Assessment year(s)
2001-02
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai v. M/S.lloyds Steel Industries Limited, the High Court (2010) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Decision: The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2204 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 6, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus M/s.Lloyds Steel Industries Limited ..Respondent. Ms.Suchitra Kamble i/by Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.Atul K. Jasani for the respondent. CORAM : Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud & J.P. Devadhar, JJ. DATE : 22[nd] January, 2010. P.C. : 1.The only question which is raised in this appeal relates to the correctness of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in so far as it confirms the deletion of a dis-allowance made by the assessing officer under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 towards estimated expenses incurred for the purposes of investment and related activities. The Tribunal has relied on its order dated 27[th ]March 2008 in the case of the assessee for assessment year 2001-02 involving an identical issue. It is common ground before us that against the order of the Tribunal for assessment year 2001-02, an appeal was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 17[th] April 2009 (Income Tax Appeal No.322 of 2009). It has not been disputed that the same question is raised in this appeal and no distinction is sought to be made by Counsel for the revenue. In the circumstances, no substantial question of law arises in view of the earlier judgment of this Court dated 17[th] April 2009 confirming the judgment of the Tribunal for an earlier assessment year. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. (J.P. Devadhar, J.) (Dr.D.Y. Chandrachud, 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