THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SPECIAL RANGE-2, AURANGABAD vs. VINAYAK SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD, AURANGABAD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the Tribunal was right and justified in its decisions. Regarding the Education Fund, the Court noted that it was covered by Section 68 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and deducted as per the directions of the Sugar Controller, aligning with the Bombay High Court's decision in Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Therefore, the deletion of additions on account of the Education Fund was upheld. For the College Fund, the Court agreed with the Tribunal's approach of remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer. The reasoning was that while the Education Fund had clear legal backing, the College Fund's purpose and the authority behind its collection were not established. The Tribunal's direction to ascertain if the collection was at the instance of the Sugar Controller was deemed proper, as this would determine if it was a non-trading receipt, following the precedent in Shri Chhatrapati Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. The Court found the substantial question of law as framed to be not properly drafted, suggesting separate questions for Education Fund and College Fund.
What were the facts?
The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Aurangabad (Appellant) filed an appeal before the Bombay High Court against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). The appeal concerned assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92 and challenged the Tribunal's decision regarding the treatment of 'Education Fund' and 'College Fund' collected by the assessee, Vinayak Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. The Tribunal had directed deletion of additions on account of Education Fund, holding it to be a non-trading receipt. For the College Fund, the Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to ascertain if the collection was at the instance of the Sugar Controller.
What were the issues?
1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that if the "College Fund" collected is at the instance of the Sugar Control Order, then the addition on account of college fund cannot be sustained as a non-trading receipt, as held in Shri Chhatrapati S.S.K. Ltd. (198 ITR 78 AT)? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the nature of receipts and applicability of precedent). Assessee's contentions: - The Education Fund collected is not income as it is recovered under Section 68 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and is covered by the decision of the Bombay High Court in Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. - The College Fund, if collected at the instance of the Sugar Controller, is a non-trading receipt, as per the Special Bench decision in Shri Chhatrapati S.S.K. Ltd. Revenue's contentions: - The revenue implicitly contested the deletion of additions for the Education Fund and the remand for the College Fund, by filing the appeal against the Tribunal's order. No specific arguments for the revenue were recorded in the judgment regarding the College Fund beyond challenging the Tribunal's order.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.29 OF 1999 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.29 OF 1999 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.29 OF 1999 The Jt.Commissioner of Income Tax Spl. R-2, Aurangabad ...Appellant. V/s. Vinayak Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. Vinayaknagar Taluka Vaijapur Dist. Aurangabad ...Respondents. Dr.P.Daniel for the Appellant. Mr.S.N.Inamdar for the Respondent. CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & CORAM: S.RADHAKRISHNAN & J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 4th July, 2005. DATE : 4th July, 2005. DATE : 4th July, 2005.
ORAL JUDGMENT : ORAL JUDGMENT : ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per J.H.Bhatia, J.) 1. In this Appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act , the Appellant has assailed the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.913/PN/1997 and 914/PN/1997 for the assessment years 1990-91 and 1991-92. The following substantial question of law has arisen in the said Appeal. "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that CNR No : HCBM020014211999 Uploaded on - 21/08/2020 Downloaded on - 28/10/2026 06:20:39
: 2 : if the "College Fund" collected (together with the education fund or independently) is at the instance of sugar control order then the addition on account of college fund cannot be sustained being a nontrading receipt as held by the Special Bench in the case of Shri Chhatrapati S.S.K.Ltd. (198 ITR 78 AT)" 2. Heard the learned counsels for both the sides. Perused the record. It may be stated that for the assessment year 1990-91, deductions received by the Respondent Society as contribution to the Education Fund were directed to be deleted by the Tribunal, holding that such contribution is not an income as it is recovered under section 68 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act and this point is covered by decision of the Bombay High Court in Krishna Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in Income Tax Reference No.61/98 dated 17/7/97. In view of the legal position to the extent of Education Fund settled by the Division Bench of this Court, Uploaded on - 21/08/2020 Downloaded on - 28/10/2026 06:20:39
: 3 : no question remains to be decided on that count. 3. About the assessment year 1990-91, the Society had collected certain amount towards the College Fund. The Tribunal has remanded the matter to the Assessment Officer with the direction to find out whether the aforesaid amount was deducted at the instance of Sugar Controller. If yes, issue be covered in favour of the Assessee, by the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Chhatrapati Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and in absence of any direction of Sugar Controller, the Assessment Officer shall be at liberty to decide the matter in accordance with law. Contribution to the College Fund is not covered by any authority of this Court or the Supreme Court. The direction given by the Tribunal was proper. 4. Infact, the substantial question of law raised as above, was not properly drafted. The Education Fund is specifically covered by Section 68 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Uploaded on - 21/08/2020 Downloaded on - 28/10/2026 06:20:39
: 4 : Societies Act as it is deducted as per the directions of the Sugar Controller. But in absence of such direction about the College Fund, it is not known for what purpose and by whom, the said Fund is used. Therefore, two separate questions should have been raised. 5. Any how, in view of the aforesaid facts, we hold that the Tribunal was right and justified in holding that the Education Fund is liable to be deducted and the Tribunal was also justified in remanding the matter to the extent of College Fund to the Assessment Officer. 6. The Appeal stands dismissed, accordingly. (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (S.RADHAKRISHNAN,J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) (J.H.BHATIA, J.) Uploaded on - 21/08/2020 Downloaded on - 28/10/2026 06:20:39 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
More judgments on Section 68
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
- Bliss Dealtrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs Income Tax Officer - Ward 9(2) Kolkata…ITA 208/KOL/2026[2012-13]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-13
- Hemal Paresh Madeka, Rajkot vs Asst.Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 955/RJT/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2020-21
- Ajaybhai Dineshbhai Bagdai, Near Central… vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(1), New…ITA 74/RJT/2026[2013-14]Status: Disposed19 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- U Days Garments vs. The Adjudication OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S Jsw Cement Limited,Jajpur vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 16 Oct 2026
- M/S.Sreeshobi Enterprises vs. The Appellate AuthorityMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- S.T.Promotors vs. The Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 16 Oct 2026
- Prashanti Das (M/S. Panchamukhi Enterprises) vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Jagatsinghpur CircleOrissa · 16 Oct 2026