Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AHMEDABAD versus ARVIND POLYCOT LTD.

Decided
8 February 2008
Judges listed
S.H. KAPADIA (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Dismissed

Citations

Official
[2008] 2 S.C.R. 650 · 2008 INSC 160

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

1

Leave granted.

p. 651, margin B

2

In this civil appeal filed by the Department the question of law arises for determination which question is as follows: "Whether interest paid in respect of borrowings on capital assets not put to use in the concerned financial year can be permitted as allowable deduction under Section 36(1 )(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?"

p. 651, margin B

3

Our answer to the above-mentioned question is squarely ' covered by our decision in favour of the assessee and against the Department in the case of Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Ahmedabad v. Mis. Core Health Care Ltd. in Civil Appeal , Nos.3952-55 of 2002.

p. 651, margin C

4

Accordingly the said question is answered in favour of assessee and against the Department. Consequently the • Department's civil appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. D.G. Appeal dismissed.

p. 651, margin D