Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Siddhant Ice Cream P Limited

High Court 29 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Siddhant Ice Cream P Limited
Date of order
29 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai v. Siddhant Ice Cream P Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: 2.The question sought to be raised in this appeal revolves around the issue as to whether the royalty income from leasing of trade marks was to be treated as business income or income from other sources.

Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

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.594 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus Siddhant Ice Cream P Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant.Mr.A.K. Sharma with Mr.P.C. Tripathi for the respondent. CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ. DATE : 29TH JULY, 2009 P.C. : 1.Heard learned counsel for the revenue. 2.The question sought to be raised in this appeal revolves around the issue as to whether the royalty income from leasing of trade marks was to be treated as business income or income from other sources. The tribunal has relied upon the order passed in the case of assessee itself for earlier assessment years, wherein royalty income received by the assessee on leasing out the trademark and giving technical know-how be directed to be taxed as business income and not as income from other sources. Said order has been accepted by the revenue. 3.In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
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