Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 368 - AT - Income TaxTaxability of “Excess Sugarcane Price” - excess price paid by the assessee to sugarcane suppliers, i.e. the price over and above the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) fixed by State Government for purchase of cane - HELD THAT:- As considered the order of Co-ordinate Bench in the case of DCIT vs. Vasant Rao Dada Patil SSK Ltd. (2019 (3) TMI 1637 - ITAT PUNE) after considering the binding judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd. [2019 (3) TMI 321 - SUPREME COURT] indentical to the issue relating to excess sugarcane price paid by the assessee the issue is restored to the file of AO and also consider the contentions of assessee with respect to SMP vis-a-vis FRP regime, where ever raised. AO shall decide the issue, after affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the respective assessees, in accordance with law. AO shall also give due consideration to the issues raised by the assessee with effect to applicability/non-applicability of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court as the case may be and decide the issue accordingly. Thus, the issue of excess cane price paid to sugarcane suppliers is allowed for statistical purposes in the aforesaid terms. Provision for Vasantdada Sugar Institute (VSI) Contribution - HELD THAT:- It is found that the ld. CIT(A) has determined this issue in favour of the assessee by following the order passed by the Pune Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Bhima S.S.K. Ltd. (2019 (3) TMI 906 - ITAT PUNE). No material has been placed on record to show that this order of the Tribunal has been reversed or modified in any manner by the Hon’ble High Court. Respectfully following the precedent, we decide this issue in favour of the assessee Disallowance of contribution towards Area Development Fund - HELD THAT:- Both sides are unanimous in stating that the issue of disallowance of Area Development Fund in present set of appeals is identical to the one already decided by the Co-ordinate Bench. In the light of directions of Co-ordinate Bench on the issue in hand, the same is restored back to the file of Assessing Officer. Deduction u/s 80P on interest income earned on deposits with Co-operative Bank - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) in the context of section 36(1)(iii) held that where both interest free funds and interest bearing funds are available, and interest free funds are sufficient to cover the investments made, it shall be presumed that investments are made out of interest free funds available with the assessee. Same analogy was applied by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014 (8) TMI 119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) in respect of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii). Extending the same principle here, we find merit in the submissions of the assessee. No material is brought on record by the assessee to show availability of funds for making investment in deposits during the relevant period. Restore this issue back to the file of Assessing Officer for the limited purpose of ascertaining fund position when the deposits were made by the assessee. AO shall decide the issue de-novo in line with our above observations. Ground relating to disallowance u/s. 80P(2)(d) is allowed for statistical purpose.
|