The Commissioner Of Income Tax , City – 10, Mumbai v. M/S.fiat India Private Limited
High Court
12 Aug 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax , City – 10, Mumbai v. M/S.fiat India Private Limited
Date of order
12 Aug 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax , City – 10, Mumbai v. M/S.fiat India Private Limited, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1002 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax , City – 10, Mumbai..Appellant.
Versus
M/s.Fiat India Private Limited
..Respondent.
Mr.B.M. Chatterjee for the appellant.
Mr.P.J. Pardiwala with Mr.Jas Sanghvi i/by PDS Legal for the respondent.
CORAM : V.C. DAGA & J.P. DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATE : 12TH AUGUST 2009
P.C. :
1.Heard learned counsel for the appellant-revenue and the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that the assessee had suffered loss of Rs.78,57,70,023/- and thereafter right upto 2005-2006, the assessee has suffered continuous loss, with the result the right of the assessee to get the loss set off has lost. Under these circumstances, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-assessee submits that the issue has really become academic. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant-revenue does not dispute this assertion made by the respondent-assessee.
2.In this view of the matter, no substantial question of law warranting adjudication can be said to be arise in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine with no order as to costs.
(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.