Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Mu...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Mukta Arts Pvt.ltd

High Court 25 Aug 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Mukta Arts Pvt.ltd
Date of order
25 Aug 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S Mukta Arts Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: We have perused the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 2nd May, 2001 and also the question of law sought to be raised in the above appeal which reads as under: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was justified in holding that the...

Decision: Hence the above appeal is totally misconceived and therefore, stands dismissed.

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

The order — as passed by the High Court

-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J. Income Tax Appeal No.584 of 2001 The Commissioner of Income Tax ..Appellant vs. M/s Mukta Arts Pvt.Ltd. ..Respondent Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. Mr.K.Shivram with Mr.A.R.Singh i/b Vima Dalal and Co. for respondent. CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. 25th August, 2008 P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. We have perused the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 2nd May, 2001 and also the question of law sought to be raised in the above appeal which reads as under: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was justified in holding that the cost of production of the abandoned film "DEVAA" is trading loss.? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances -2- of the case and in law, the Hon’ble ITAT was justified in not appreciating the fact that the character of negative film which cannot be exhibited is that of the capital nature and not as stock-in-trade?" 3. After hearing the parties for some time, the learned Counsel for the appellant concedes that there is no question of law involved in the above appeal and the appeal is actually misconceived and especially in view of the fact that the film in question was admittedly not released and hence it is merely a stock in trade and there is no question of the same being capital asset. Mr.Shivram also pointed out that the Assessing Officer has given effect to the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax. Hence the above appeal is totally misconceived and therefore, stands dismissed. (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN 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