The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.supreme Vinyil Films Ltd
High Court
27 Feb 2008 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.supreme Vinyil Films Ltd
Date of order
27 Feb 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S.supreme Vinyil Films Ltd, the High Court (2008) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Issue: The question of law as framed is as under:- Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Hon’ble Tribunal is right in allowing the deduction of interest even though it does not pertain to the relevant assessment year.?" The Appeal was preferred by the assessee on various gro...
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
(-1-)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
NOTICE OF MOTION NO.4172 OF 2007
WITH
INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.1923 OF 2007
The Commissioner of Income Tax...Appellant
Vs.
M/s.Supreme Vinyil Films Ltd..Respondent
Mr.A.D. Kango and Mr. P.S. Sahadevan, for the
Appellant.
CORAM: F.I.
R.S.MOHITE,JJ.
P.C.:
P.C.:
. There is a delay of 621 days.
2. The question of law as framed is as under:-
Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case and in law,
Hon’ble Tribunal is right in allowing the
deduction of interest even though it does
not pertain to the relevant assessment
year.?"
The Appeal was preferred by the assessee on various
grounds before the Tribunal. The learned Tribunal relied upon the Judgment of this Court in CIT vs.Kirloskar Tractors Limited, 231 ITR 849.
(-2-)
3. Considering the above in our opinion the
question of law as framed would not arise and
consequently the Notice of Motion and Appeal
dismissed.
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S.MOHITE, J.)
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.
EaseValue