Itxa/2784/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nashik-2 v. Niphad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
High Court
17 Sep 2007 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Itxa/2784/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nashik-2 v. Niphad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
Date of order
17 Sep 2007
Assessment year(s)
1994-95
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Itxa/2784/2010 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I, Nashik-2 v. Niphad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, the High Court (2007) decided the matter.
Issue: 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 2(4) of the Maharashtra Co-op.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARYORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.713 OF 2005
INCOME TAX APPEAL (LOD) NO.713 OF 2005
The Commissioner of Income-tax-1,
Kendrya Rajaswa Bhawan, 2nd floor,
Gadkari Chowk, Old Agra Road,
Nashik - 2. ..Appellant.
V/s.
Niphad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana
Ltd. Bhausaheb Nagar, Tal.
Niphad, Dist. Nashik. ..Respondent.
Mr.B.M.Chatterjee with Mrs.P.P.Bhosale for appellant.
Mr.S.N.Inamdar with A.K.Jasani for respondent.
CORAM : F.I.REBELLO
CORAM : F.I.REBELLOANDJ.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.
DATED : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2007.
DATED : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2007.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
1. Matter not on board. The appeal is taken up
for admission by consent of parties.
2. This appeal is filed by Commissioner of Income
Tax under section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
against the order of the ITAT dated 2/12/2004 relating
to the assessment year 1994-95.
3. Appeal is admitted on the following questions
of law:-
-= : 2 : =-
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 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
2(4) of the Maharashtra Co-op. Societies Act,
1960 and it was allowable as business
expenditure ?
4. Counsel on both the sides agree that the
aforesaid questions of law are covered by the decision
of this Court in the case of C.I.T. V/s. Manjara
Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in Income Tax
Appeal No.318 of 2007 decided on 14th August, 2007 in
favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
5. Accordingly, all the questions are answered in
favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
6. Appeal disposed of accordingly with no order
as to costs.
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
(J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)
-= : 3 : =-
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.