The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICGTION INCOME TAX REFERENCE NO. 57 of 1990 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Applicant. vs. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd., .... Respondent Mr. Ashok Kotangale. Sr. Counsel for Applicant.Mr. B. J. Pardiwala i/b.Rajesh Shah & Co., for Respondent. CORAM:V.C.DAGA AND A. S. AGUIAR JJ. Date: 7[th] July, 2005. P. C.: 1. The questions of law referred to this court for opinion under section256(1) of the Income-tax Act, by the Tribunal at the instance of the256(1) of the Income-tax Act, by the Tribunal at the instance of the assessee are as follows: 1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that theassessee is entitled to a deduction for the amount ofRs.1,79,851/- transferred, out of the sale proceeds, tothe Molasses Storage Fund? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that theassessee was not liable to be taed on the additionalprice of Rs.42,16,201/- recovered by the assessee? 2. Counsel for both sides agree that the questions referred to above forour opinion have already been covered either by the judgment of thiscourt or that of the Supreme Court. our opinion have already been covered either by the judgment of thiscourt or that of the Supreme Court. 3. So far as the first question is concerned, both parties agree that the same is covered by the judgment of this court in the case of Somaiya Orgeno- Chemicals Ltd., vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [1995] 216 ITR 291 (Bom.) and also that of Commissioner ofIncome Tax vs. New Horizon Sugar Mills P. Ltd., reported in (2004)269 ITR 391 (S.C.). In view of the above , we answer the firstquestion in the affirmative, that is, in favour of the assessee andagainst the Revenue. 4. So far as the second question is concerned both paries agree thatthe same is also covered by the decision in the case ofCommissioner of Income Tax v. Seksaria Biswan Sugar FactoryPvt. Ltd., reported in [1992] 195 ITR 778 (Bom. ), in the case ofCommissioner of Income Tax vs. Kesar Sugar Works Ltd.,reported in [1999 ] 239 ITR page 398 (Bom.). In view of theabove, we answer the abovequestion in the affirmative, i.e., infavour of the assessee and against the revenue. 5. This reference stands disposed of in the above terms with no orderas to costs. as to costs. (V. C. DAGA J. ) (A. S. AGUIAR J.)