The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Warana Sahakari Sakhar
High Court
09 Jan 2008 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Warana Sahakari Sakhar
Date of order
09 Jan 2008
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shree Warana Sahakari Sakhar, the High Court (2008) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: However, as the questions are covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court and of this Court, the appeal is admitted on the following questions : (a) Whether the ITAT, Pune Bench, Pune is right in holding that there is no mistake apparent from the record in the impugned order of the ITAT dt.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
((-1-))
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1457 OF 2006
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
Shree Warana Sahakari Sakhar
Karkhana Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and
Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants.
Mr. S.S. Patwardhan for Respondent.
CORAM: F.I.
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: JANUARY 09, 2008
P.C.
P.C.
. The tax incidence is only of Rs.1.47 lakh.
However, as the questions are covered by the
judgment of the Supreme Court and of this Court, the
appeal is admitted on the following questions :
(a) Whether the ITAT, Pune Bench, Pune is
right in holding that there is no mistake
apparent from the record in the impugned
order of the ITAT dt. 2/8/2004 passed in
ITA No. 563/PN/1995 for assessment year
1993-94 in case of DCIT SR-1, Kop. Vs.
Shri. Warana SSK Ltd., Kolhapur when the
decision of the ITAT dated 2/8/2004 on the
((-2-))
point of taxability of Area Development Fund
and Cane Development Fund is directly
against the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment
dated 8/9/2004 passed in the case of
Siddheshwar SSK Ltd. Vs. CIT Kolhapur and
Others - 270 ITR 1?
(b) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case the Tribunal was
right in treating that the rectification
application filed u/s.254(2) was a review of
its own order, whereas the rectification of
an order passed by the ITAT in accordance
with the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment,
even if passed substantially, is well within
the purview of sec.254(2)?"
. In so far as cane development fund is concerned,
the issue has to be answered in favour of assessee
and against Revenue. In so far as Area Development
fund is concerned, considering the judgment of the
Supreme Court as noted by our Bench of this court in
CIT Vs. Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. 279
ITR 19 BOM the matter is remanded back to the
tribunal for fresh determination according to law.
The appeal allowed accordingly. No order as to
costs.
((-3-))
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I.REBELLO, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, 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.
EaseValue