The Commissioner Of Income Tax -Iii v. Sahyadri Sah.sakhar Karkhana Ltd

rrt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 4031OF 2010 ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTIONINCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 4031OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax -III ..Appellant. Vs. Sahyadri Sah.Sakhar Karkhana Ltd ..Respondent. Mr. Vimal Gupta, for the Appellant. Mr. S.N.Inamdar, for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 7TH JULY, 2011. P.C. 1.Heard. 2.Four questions of law raised by the revenue in this appeal read thus :- (1)Whether on the given facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in holding that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Excess Cane Price paid to members and non members was not justified and in holding that such payments could not be disallowed either u/s 37(1) or u/s 40A(2)(b) of the I.T Act,1961?case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in holding that the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Excess Cane Price paid to members and non members was not justified and in holding that such payments could not be disallowed either u/s 37(1) or u/s 40A(2)(b) of the I.T Act,1961? (2)Whether Hon'ble ITAT is correct on facts and in law in deciding the issue as against setting aside such issue for further enquiry to the CTI (Appeals) as required by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd and ors?deciding the issue as against setting aside such issue for further enquiry to the CTI (Appeals) as required by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd and ors? (3)Whether on the given facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT was correct in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of difference between the market price of sugar and concessional price at which sugar was sold to the cane growers by holding that no income accrued to the assessee on concessional sales and, therefore, the assessee was not liable to be assessed on the difference? (4)Whether the Hon'ble ITAT did not err on facts and in law in not treating such difference as constituting distribution of profits? 3.As regards the first two questions are concerned, counsel for the parties state that the said questions be restored to the file of CIT(A) for fresh consideration in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of DCIT Vs Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd, (2010) 189 Taxman 81. Accordingly, the first two questions are restored to the file of CIT (A) for re-consideration in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd (supra). 4.As regards third and fourth questions are concerned, counsel for the parties state that similar questions raised by the revenue have been answered by this court in favour of the assessee in the case of CIT Vs. Kisanveer Satara Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, ITXA 930 of 2008 decided on 30.6.2009. In this view of the matter, the question nos 3 and 4 cannot be entertained. 5.Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)