Income-Tax v. Solapur Dist. Co-Op. Milk Producers And Process Union Ltd. & Anr. 315 Itr 304
High Court
09 Jan 2017 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Income-Tax v. Solapur Dist. Co-Op. Milk Producers And Process Union Ltd. & Anr. 315 Itr 304
Date of order
09 Jan 2017
Assessment year(s)
2007-08
Outcome
Dismissed
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Income-Tax v. Solapur Dist. Co-Op. Milk Producers And Process Union Ltd. & Anr. 315 Itr 304, the High Court (2017) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 5.The appeal is dismissed.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1309 OF 2014
The Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Kolhapur
.. Appellant
v/s.
Mahalaxmi Sahakari Dudh Utpadak Sangh Ltd. .. Respondent
Mr. N.N. Singh for the appellant None for the respondent
CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & A.K. MENON, J.J.
P.C.
DATED : 9[th] JANUARY, 2017.
1.This Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 27[th] December 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2007-08.
2.The Revenue urges the following substantial question of law for our consideration :-
(a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the payment of rate difference after the closure of the accounting
year do not amount to distribution of profit, as the amount to be paid was not out of the profit ascertained at the annual general meeting?
3.Mr. Singh, learned Counsel for the Revenue in support of the
appeal very fairly states that the issue arising herein stands concluded against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of
Income-Tax Vs. Solapur Dist. Co-op. Milk Producers and Process Union Ltd. & Anr. 315 ITR 304.
4.In the above view, the question, as formulated, does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained.
5.The appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(A.K. MENON, J.)
(M.S. SANKLECHA, 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.