Income-Tax, Aurangabad v. Ambejogai Sahakari Sakhar
High Court
24 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income-Tax, Aurangabad v. Ambejogai Sahakari Sakhar
Date of order
24 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income-Tax, Aurangabad v. Ambejogai Sahakari Sakhar, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
(-1-)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.323 OF 2007
The Commissioner of
Income-tax, Aurangabad...........Appellant
Versus
Ambejogai Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Ltd.......................Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Mrs. P.P.Bhosale and
Shri P.S. Sahadevan, for the Appellant
Mr. S.N. Inamdar with Mr. A.K. Jasani, for the
Respondent
CORAM: F.I.
CORAM: F.I.REBELLO&J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.DATED: 24th September,2007
J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
DATED: 24th September,2007
P.C.:
P.C.:
. The question of law are formulated in
para.15 of the Appeal Memo. Question Nos. I to VII
are reframed as under:-
1.Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right
in law in holding that provisions of Section
40A(2) (a) are not applicable to a
co-operative Society?
2. Whether, on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Appellate
Tribunal was right in holding that the
(-2-)
additional payment over and above the
statutory minimum price (SMP) was cane price
and not diversion of profit and as such
allowable as business expenditure under
section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
3. Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case cane price/Khodki
charges paid by the assessee was not "Bonus"
within the meaning of Section 2(4) of the
Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960
and it was allowable as business
expenditure?
They are covered by the judgment of this Court in
Income Tax Appeal No.318 of 2007 & other Appeals
decided on 14th August, 2007 in the case of
Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Manjara Sahakari
Sahkar Karkhana Ltd.
2. The question at Serial No.8 is covered by
the judgment of this Court in Income Tax Appeal
No.273 of 2007 in the case of CIT vs. Samarth
Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. decided on 17th
September, 2007.
. In the light of that Question No.9 does not
arise.
(-3-)
3. In so far as question No.10 is concerned,
considering the CBDT Circular learned Counsel does
not press the same.
4. In the light of the above questions are
answered in the affirmative, in favour of the
assessee and against the Revenue. Appeal disposed
of accordingly.
(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, 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.