Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Xlo In...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Xlo India Ltd

High Court 25 Jun 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Xlo India Ltd
Date of order
25 Jun 2008
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Dismissed

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Xlo India Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: The question of law proposed to be framed in the present appeal reads as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the proportionate disallowance of interest on the interest free loans and advances to : 2 : sister concerns?" 2.

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.1280 OF 2000 The Commissioner of Income Tax ...Appellant Versus XLO India Ltd. ...Respondent ...... Mr.A.D.Kango i/b Mr.R.N.Bandopadhyay for Appellant. Mr.S.G.Dalal for Respondent. ...... CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & V.M.KANADE, J. CORAM: SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & V.M.KANADE, J. DATED: JUNE 25, 2008. DATED: JUNE 25, 2008. P.C. P.C. 1. Challenge in the present Appeal is to the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26th April 2000. The question of law proposed to be framed in the present appeal reads as under: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in deleting the proportionate disallowance of interest on the interest free loans and advances to : 2 : sister concerns?" 2. We may notice that the above question, in the facts and circumstances of the case, can hardly be treated as substantial question of law, inasmuch as, it is purely based on given facts of the case. The Tribunal in the impugned order had clearly held that the Department had failed to prove any nexus between the borrowed funds and the advances alleged to have given to the sister concern. It was also noticed that in the earlier years, the view of the Tribunal was in favour of the assessee and even for the consistent years, the same view was followed by the Tribunal. It is not even the case that for the earlier financial year relating to the same assessee, the Department has questioned the correctness of the order of the Tribunal successfully. No question of law. Dismissed. Sd/- CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- V.M.KANADE, 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