DCIT v. Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd.

Siddheshwar Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Aurangabad

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.662/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Siddheshwar Sahakari Vs. Acit-1, Aurangabad. Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Maniknagar, Taluka- Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad. Pan : Aabas6026L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 28.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.10.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2014-15 Arises Against The Cit(A)-1, Aurangabad’S Order Dated 02.01.2018 Passed In Case No. Abd/Cit(A)-1/285/2016-17, Involving Proceedings U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Case Called Twice. None Appears At Assessee’S Behest. It Had Also Not Appeared On 24.11.2021, 03.02.2022, 11.07.2022, 12.07.2022 & 21.07.2022 As Well. The Assessee Is Proceeded Ex- Parte Therefore. 2. The Assessee Raises Twin Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal As Follows :-

…tion of CBDT circular no.6/2007 dated 11/10/2007. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the above addition by relying on the ratio of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. SatpadaTapi SSK 326 ITR 42, the facts of the case do not have any connection whatsoever with the issue raised before CIT(A), being harvesting and the transport charges disallowed by Learned Assessing Officer and therefore the action of confirming the arbitrary addition of Rs.1,87,76,443/- is incorrect and deserves to be deleted in its entirety.” 3. Mr. Jasnani vehemently ar…

Shree Adinath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Solapur

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3035 To 3038/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1998-99 To 2001-02

…erent prices as noted by AO himself at page 2 of his order. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) did not even allow deduction under clause 5A which the CIT(A)-V had accepted in Shree Dnyaneshwar pursuant to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 326 ITR 42 to compute income on "real income" basis. 6. Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon report of a Committee headed by one Mr. Godbole whose report was neither made available to the appellant nor was Mr. Godoble made available for cross examination and the said report which was rejected by the State Govt. cannot be a basis for confirming the disallowance. 7. L…

Shree Adinath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Solapur

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3035 To 3038/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1998-99 To 2001-02

…erent prices as noted by AO himself at page 2 of his order. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) did not even allow deduction under clause 5A which the CIT(A)-V had accepted in Shree Dnyaneshwar pursuant to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 326 ITR 42 to compute income on "real income" basis. 6. Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon report of a Committee headed by one Mr. Godbole whose report was neither made available to the appellant nor was Mr. Godoble made available for cross examination and the said report which was rejected by the State Govt. cannot be a basis for confirming the disallowance. 7. L…

Shree Adinath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Solapur

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3035 To 3038/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1998-99 To 2001-02

…erent prices as noted by AO himself at page 2 of his order. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) did not even allow deduction under clause 5A which the CIT(A)-V had accepted in Shree Dnyaneshwar pursuant to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 326 ITR 42 to compute income on "real income" basis. 6. Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon report of a Committee headed by one Mr. Godbole whose report was neither made available to the appellant nor was Mr. Godoble made available for cross examination and the said report which was rejected by the State Govt. cannot be a basis for confirming the disallowance. 7. L…

Shree Adinath Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Solapur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Solapur

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.3035 To 3038/Pun/2017 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 1998-99 To 2001-02

…erent prices as noted by AO himself at page 2 of his order. 5. Without prejudice to the above, the CIT(A) did not even allow deduction under clause 5A which the CIT(A)-V had accepted in Shree Dnyaneshwar pursuant to directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 326 ITR 42 to compute income on "real income" basis. 6. Ld. CIT(A) has relied upon report of a Committee headed by one Mr. Godbole whose report was neither made available to the appellant nor was Mr. Godoble made available for cross examination and the said report which was rejected by the State Govt. cannot be a basis for confirming the disallowance. 7. L…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Warana Sah. Dudh Utadak Prakriya Sangh Ltd., Kolhapur

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1094 To 1096/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

…He submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the assessee’s own case remitted the matter to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication in view of the identical direction given by the Apex Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd. reported in 326 ITR 42 (SC). For the sake of completeness, we reproduce the finding the Apex Court and the same reads as under : “2. On the above contentions, two questions were required to be considered by the Department, which are as follows : Shri Warana Sah. Dudh Utpadak Prakriya Sangh Ltd., "Whether the above-mentioned differential payment made by the assessee(s)…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Shri Warana Sah. Dudh Utadak Prakriya Sangh Ltd., Kolhapur

In the result, all the 3 appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 1094 To 1096/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2007-08, 2009-10 & 2011-12 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

…He submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court in the assessee’s own case remitted the matter to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication in view of the identical direction given by the Apex Court in the case of DCIT Vs. Shri Satpuda Tapi Parisar SSK Ltd. reported in 326 ITR 42 (SC). For the sake of completeness, we reproduce the finding the Apex Court and the same reads as under : “2. On the above contentions, two questions were required to be considered by the Department, which are as follows : Shri Warana Sah. Dudh Utpadak Prakriya Sangh Ltd., "Whether the above-mentioned differential payment made by the assessee(s)…