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

M/S. ARUL & CO. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU & ANR.

Decided
21 April 2009
Judges listed
ARIJIT PASAYAT (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[2009] 7 S.C.R. 305 ยท 2009 INSC 566

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

Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant. The High Court relied on the decision of a Division Bench of the High Court against the assessee in writ petition No. 14768 of 2000 dated 11.12.2003. For reasons indicated in Civil appeal No. 5134-35 of2002 disposed of today, we find there is no scope for interference with the levy of tax made. However, the' penalty imposed stands set aside because of what is stated in the said appeals.

p. 305, margin E

2

The appeal is accordingly disposed of. G.N. Appeal disposed of.

p. 305, margin G