CIT, HISAR vs. JIND COOP SUGAR MILLS LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/179/2010HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01093085201006 January 2011Bench: MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was covered against it by a previous order passed on the same day in a related matter, CIT v. The Jind Coop Sugar Mills Ltd. (I.T.A. No.969 of 2008). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed. The reasoning for the dismissal is based on the precedent set by the earlier judgment, which addressed a similar issue. The specific findings or ratio decidendi from the earlier judgment, which would have guided this decision, are not detailed in this order, other than stating that the matter was covered. No specific issue was left undecided; the appeal was disposed of based on the prior ruling.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income-tax, filed an appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, dated April 24, 2009. The appeal pertains to the assessment year 2004-05. The dispute concerns the deletion of an addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of subscription and contribution made by the assessee, Jind Co-op Sugar Mills Ltd., to the State Federation of Co-operative Sugar Mills. The High Court noted that the matter was covered by a previous order passed on the same day in a related appeal.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) was right in law in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of subscription and contribution made to the State Federation of Co-operative Sugar Mills without appreciating the facts that this contribution is not relating to the assessee’s business. Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee. The deletion of the addition by the CIT(A) implies the assessee likely argued that the contribution was related to its business or was otherwise allowable. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue argued that the contribution to the State Federation of Co-operative Sugar Mills was not related to the assessee's business, and therefore, the deletion of the addition by the CIT(A) was incorrect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.179 of 2010 Date of decision: 6.1.2011 Commissioner of Income-tax. -----Appellant. Vs. Jind Co-p. Sugar Mills Ltd. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Yogesh Putney, Sr. Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 24.4.2009 in I.T.A. No.2400/Del/08 for the assessment year 2004-05 raising following question of law:- (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was right in law in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of subscription and contribution made to the State Federation of Co-operative Sugar Mills without appreciating the facts that this contribution is not relating to the assessee’s business.”

I.T.A. No.179 of 2010 It is not disputed that the matter is covered against the revenue by order passed today in I.T.A. No.969 of 2008 in CIT v. The Jind Coop Sugar Mills Ltd.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE January 06, 2011 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) ashwani JUDGE 2

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →