CIT v. Shahabad Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd.

315 ITR 351High Court2009#21032 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 80P(2)(a)(iii)

Judgments citing CIT v. Shahabad Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd.

THE DHARMAPURI DT. CO-OP SUGAR MILLS LTD.,SALEM vs. ITO, WARD-1,, DHARMAPURI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 389/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.389/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 The Dharmapuri Dt. Co-Op. Sugar Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Mills Ltd., No. 1, Thimmana Halli, Ward 1, Hosur Road, Palacode 636 808, Dharmapuri. Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Aaaat3145Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode) ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Krishna Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 24.05.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 191 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate (Erode)For Respondent: Shri P. Krishna Kumar, JCIT

Section 80P(2)(a)

…of sugar products from sugarcane supplied by its members. Further, he submits that the Hon’ble High Court taken support from the decision of Hon’ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana (Full Bench) in the case of Budhewal Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. V. CIT reported in 315 ITR 351 (P&H), which held co-operative society engaged in manufacturing of sugar out of sugarcane is entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act. Further, he drew our attention the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Morinda Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. V. CIT [2013] 354 ITR 230 (SC). He drew our attention to para 5 o…

SADASHIVRAO MANDLIK KAGAL TALUKA SAH. SAKHAR KARKHAN LTD,,KOLHAPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, KOLHAPUR

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1569/PUN/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Sadashivrao Mandlik Kagal Tal. Vs. Acit, Sah. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Circle-1, Sushant S. Phadnis C.A., 613 E Kolhapur Ward, Phadnis Chambers, Shahupuri, 1St Lane, Kolhapur – 416003 Pan : Aaaak1300Q Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234Section 271(1)(c)Section 80PSection 80P(2)

…ls) has erred in holding that the appellant was not entitled to deduction u/s. 80P (2) (a) (iii) when the issue was fully, covered in the assesses favour by the decision of Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Budhewal Co.op. Sugar Mills Ltd. as reported in 315 ITR 351. 6) On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on merit in initiating penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3 7) On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(Appeals) erred in law and on merit in levy of interest under section 234 A,B,C of t…

DYANESHWAR SSK LTD,,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, AHMEDNAGAR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in the manner aforesaid as the case may be

ITA 1090/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1090/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dyaneshwar Ssk Ltd., A/P Dyneshwar Nagar (Bhende), Taluka: Nevasa, Ahmednagar-414603. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aaaas4092H बनाम / V/S. Acit, Ahmednagar Circle, ……""यथ" / Respondent Ahmednagar. Assessee By : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue By : Smt. Shabana Parveen सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2019 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2019 आदेश / Order Per D. Karunakara Rao, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Cit(A)-2, Pune Dated 07.11.2016 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Id. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Allowing The Cane Purchase Price Actually Paid By The Appellant & By Holding That Excess Payment Over Frp Constitutes Distribution Of Profit. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & Without Prejudice To Ground No.1 The Cit(A) Has Erred In Deducting The Amount Of Harvesting & Transport From The Fair Remunerative Price For Arriving At The Excess Cane Purchase Price To Be Disallowed.

For Appellant: Shri Pratik SandbhorFor Respondent: Smt. Shabana Parveen

Section 35(1)(ii)Section 80P(2)(a)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE "ी डी. क"णाकरा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1090/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Dyaneshwar SSK Ltd., A/p Dyneshwar Nagar (Bhende), Taluka: Nevasa, Ahmednagar-414603. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant PAN : AAAAS4092H बनाम / V/s. ACIT, Ahmednagar Circle, ……""यथ" / Respondent Ahmednagar. Assessee by : Shri Pratik Sandbhor Revenue by : Smt. Shabana Parveen सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 23.07.2019 घोष…

M/S INTERNATIONAL AIRCON,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5525/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…same as inapplicable in the assessee’s case. Therefore, laying our hands on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petroproduct (supra) and of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Shahabad Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd., 315 ITR 351 (P&H) cited by the assessee, we do not find any justification to sustain the penalty in the instant case. Accordingly, the ITA No. 5525/Del./2015 5 impugned order deserves to be set aside and the impugned penalty deserves to be cancelled. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 19.09.2017.…