Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee appealed against a disallowance of Rs. 2,56,12,679/- on account of excessive sugarcane price paid to farmers, as made in the assessment order for A.Y. 2011-12. This ground was also raised before the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had already directed the Assessing Officer to delete the said addition. As the relief sought by the assessee had already been granted, the Tribunal found that no prejudice was caused to the assessee, and therefore, the appeal before the ITAT was not maintainable.
Key Issues
Whether an appeal before the ITAT is maintainable when the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has already granted the relief sought by the assessee, thus causing no grievance or cause of action for further appeal.
Sections Cited
250, 143(3), 254, 253
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE
Before: MS.ASTHA CHANDRA & DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE
Assessment Year: 2011-12 Yeshwant Sahakari Sakhar V National E-Assessment Karkhana Ltd., s Centre. A/p.Chintamaninagar, Tal.Haveli, Dist. Pune-412110 PAN: AAATY0164B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Smt. Sonal L Sonkavde – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 30/09/2025 Date of pronouncement 30/09/2025 आदेश/ ORDER
PER DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM:
This appeal filed by the Assessee against the order of ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeal)[NFAC], passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y.2011-12 dated 19.06.2025 emanating from the Assessment Order passed under section 143(3) R.W.S. 254 of the Act, dated 29.09.2021. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :
[A] “1. On the fact and in the circumstance of the case and in law of the learned NFAC Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) Delhi, has erred in disallowing and adding back an amount of Rs.2,56,12,679/- on account of Excessive sugarcane price paid to farmers
The appellant craves for the leave, add, alter, amend, modify and delete any or all the above grounds of appeals before or at the time of the hearing.”
Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard ld.DR for the Revenue and perused the records. At the outset, ld.DR brought to our notice that the appeal filed by the Assessee is not maintainable as ground of appeal regarding excess sugarcane price has been allowed by ld.CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) directed Assessing Officer to delete the addition. Ld.DR read out the relevant paragraph of the order of the ld.CIT(A).
3. We have perused the order of ld.CIT(A). The relevant paragraph of ld.CIT(A) is reproduced here as under : “The case of appellant pertains to AY 2011-12. The appellant being a sugar cooperative is eligible for such relaxation announced by the Central Government. As such without going into the merits of the case, the contentions of the department as well as the appellant, the disallowance of Rs.2,56,12,679/- made in the assessment order now stand permitted as expenditure. Consequently, the addition made on the ground of excess payment made to sugar cane farmers for the purchase of sugar cane is deleted.” 2 3.1 Thus, ld.CIT(A) has directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.
4. The Assessee has raised only one ground before us which is regarding excess sugarcane price paid to farmers. The said ground was also raised before ld.CIT(A) and ld.CIT(A) has directed the AO to delete the addition. Therefore, there is no prejudice caused to the Assessee. There is no cause of action arising out of impugned order of ld.CIT(A). As per Section 253, an Assessee aggrieved by order of ld.CIT(A) can file appeal before ITAT. In this case, as we have stated there is no cause of action arising out of impugned order of ld.CIT(A). Hence, there is no cause for Assessee being aggrieved.
In these facts and circumstances of the case, appeal filed by the Assessee is not maintainable. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee is dismissed.
In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 30 September, 2025.