9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (6) TMI 444X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim of the assessee. - I.T.A. No.2464/Mum/2018 - - - Dated:- 24-5-2021 - Shri Shamim Yahya, AM And Shri Amarjit Singh, JM For the Assessee : Shri Pankaj R. Toprani For the Revenue : Ms. Jyotilakshmi Mayak Shri Sreenivasaraghavan ORDER PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: The assessee has filed the present appeal against the order dated 20.03.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -08, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the A.Ys. 2013-14. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds: - I . The Ld. Commissioner of income Tax (Appeals) - 8, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. CIT (A) ) erred in law and on facts in upholding the disallowance of ₹ 4,25,53, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee company filed the return of income on 28.09.2014 declaring total income to the tune of Rs. Nil as per normal provision of the I. T. Act and Book Profit u/s 115JB of the Act of ₹ 49,39,072/-. Subsequently, the assessee filed the revised return of income declaring the same income. The case was selected for scrutiny. Notices u/s 143(2) 142(1) of the Act were issued and served upon the assesse. The assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of white crystal sugar, generation and distribution of power and ancillary products. On appraisal of tax report, it was observed that the assessee qualified an amount of ₹ 4,25,53,711/- towards prior period expens ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ries (Kotah) Ltd. (Rajasthan High Court 266 ITR 414 (iii) CIT Vs. Appollo Textiles Agency (Allahabad High Court 283 ITR 591) (iv) CIT Vs. Mahanagar Gas Ltd. (Bombay High Court (2014) 42 taxmann.com 40). However, on the other hand, the Ld. Representative of the Department has refuted the said contentions. It is not in dispute that an amount in question was paid to the commission growers Co-operative Society which was under Statutory liability under UP Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 during the relevant assessment year according to the order dated 19.06.2012 passed by Collector District Magistrate, Bijnor, Uttar Pradesh. The commission was paid under the statutory provision in view of the UP Sugarcane (Regulation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
