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

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.delite Enterprises

High Court 26 Feb 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.delite Enterprises
Date of order
26 Feb 2009
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.delite Enterprises, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessing Officer cannot consider notional interest on deposit received by the Assessee Company while arriving at the fair market value u/s.23(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act?" 2.

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.110 of 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax..Appellant Vs. M/s.Delite Enterprises ...Respondent Mr.Vimal Gupta with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the appellant. Mr.J.P. Mistri with Mr. Raj Darak for the Respondent CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&R.S.MOHITE, JJ.DATED: 26th February, 2009 CORAM: F.I. R.S.MOHITE, JJ. DATED: 26th February, 2009 P.C.: P.C.: . Revenue is in appeal on the following questions:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of interest paid by the Assessee Company on borrowed funds amounting to Rs.241.10 lakhs overlooking the fact that the borrowed funds were used by the Assessee Company to invest in the Capital of another Partnership Firm and since profits derived by the Assessee Company from a Partnership firm were exempt from tax u/s.10(2A) of the Income-tax Act, the interest expense related to such tax free profits is to be disallowed u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act? (B) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the Hon’ble Tribunal was right in holding that the Assessing Officer cannot consider notional interest on deposit received by the Assessee Company while arriving at the fair market value u/s.23(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act?" 2. In so far as Question (A) is concerned, on facts we find that there is no profit for the relevant assessment year. Hence the question as framed would not arise. 3. In so far as Question (B) is concerned, the Tribunal followed the judgment of this Court in J.K. J.K. Investors (Bom) Ltd. 248 ITR 723 (Bom.). Investors (Bom) Ltd. 248 ITR 723 (Bom.). Nothing Investors (Bom) Ltd. 248 ITR 723 (Bom.). has been brought to our notice that the ratio of this judgment would not be applicable. In the light of that the said question would not arise. Consequently Appeal dismissed. (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.) (R.S.MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO,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