Case LawHigh Court › Hutatma Kisan Ahir Sahakari Sakhar Karkh...

Hutatma Kisan Ahir Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Sangli v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range-1, Kohapur

High Court 16 Feb 2010 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Hutatma Kisan Ahir Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Sangli v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range-1, Kohapur
Date of order
16 Feb 2010
Assessment year(s)
1996-97
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In Hutatma Kisan Ahir Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Sangli v. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range-1, Kohapur, the High Court (2010) decided the matter.

Decision: The appeal is accordingly disposed of.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYO. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.813 OF 2006 Hutatma Kisan Ahir Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Sangli....Appellant. Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-1, Kohapur....Respondent. ..... Mr.Ajit M.Savagare i/b. Mr.S.S. Patwardhan for the Appellant.Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD &J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. 16[th] February, 2010. P.C. : The Tribunal has disposed of the appeal, relying upon the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in CIT vs. Shri Chhatrapati S.S.K. Ltd., (2000) 245 ITR 498. The appeal before the Tribunal related to (i) Non-refundable deposits; (ii) Pre seasonal non-refundable deposits; (iii) Interest on non-refundable deposit and (iv) C.M’s Relief Fund. In view of the subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in Siddheshawar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. vs. CIT, (2004) 12 SCC 1, it would be appropriate and proper for this Court to remand the proceedings back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration of the facts on the basis of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decision. In order to facilitate a fresh order on remand, the impugned order of the Tribunal is set aside. ITA 200/PN/2000 pertaining to Assessment Year 1996-97 is accordingly restored to the file of the Tribunal for a fresh decision on merits. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, 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