The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Mahankali Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
High Court
22 Jul 2009 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Mahankali Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd
Date of order
22 Jul 2009
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Dismissed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Shri Mahankali Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, the High Court (2009) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.
Decision: 4.In the above view of the matter both the appeals stand dismissed in limine for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
bgp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1446 OF 2009WITHINCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1447 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs.
Shri Mahankali Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd.
..Appellant
..Respondent
Mr.Vimal Gupta for appellant.
CORAM :- V.C.DAGA &J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ. 22ND JULY, 2009
DATE :
P.C.
Heard.
2.Following substantial questions of law sought to be raised in the present appeals :
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right deleting the addition made on account of sale of sugar at concessional rate to members when it is nothing but diversion of profit, relying on the decisions of Pune Bench Tribunal number 1924-26/PN/90 dated 1[st] August, 1996 in the case of Shri Chhatrapati Shahu S.S.K. Ltd. Kagal and also relying on Hon’ble Bombay High Court’s decision in the case of Shree Panchganga Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. 250 ITR 772 ?
3.Learned Counsel for the appellant fairly states, that the issue involved in the above appeals is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT Vs.Kisanvir Shetkari Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. decided on 30th June, 2009 in ITXANo.930 of 2008.
4.In the above view of the matter both the appeals stand dismissed in limine for want of substantial question of law with no order as to costs.
(J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)
(V.C.DAGA,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.