NDLI: C.i.t. Bombay Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	1966 Determination of price s.37(1) 1961 Clause 3 and 5A Sugar Cane (Control) Order Income Tax Act
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) Income Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961)
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Disposed Off
Headnote	Sugar Cane (Control) Order, 1966: Clause 3 and 5A –Determination of price – The additional price is determined under Clause 5A at the end of the season and as per Second Schedule to the Control Order, 1966 – Therefore, at the time when the additional purchase price is determined/fixed under Clause 5A, the accounts are settled and the particulars are provided by the concerned cooperative society what will be the expenditure; what can be the profit etc. – So far as the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) determined under Clause 3 of the Control Order, 1966 by the Central Government is concerned, it is at the beginning of the season –Therefore, the difference of amount between the SMP determined under Clause 3 and the SAP/additional purchase price determined under Clause 5A has an element of profit and/or one of the components would be the profit.Income Tax Act, 1961: s.37(1) – Disallowance for excessive and unreasonable cane purchase price paid to the members/non-members of the sugarcane – Whether the sugarcane purchase price paid to the cane growers by the assessee-society more than the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) and as determined under Clause5A of the Control Order, 1966, can be said to be the sharing of profit/appropriation of profit – Held: The difference of amount between the SMP determined under Clause 3 and SAP/additional purchase price determined under Clause 5A has an element of profit and/or one of the components would be profit – However, at the same time, the entire/whole amount of difference between the SMP and the SAP per se cannot be said to be an appropriation of profit– Only that part/component of profit, while determining the final price worked out/SAP/additional purchase price would be and/orcan be said to be an appropriation of profit and for that an exercise is to be done by the assessing officer by calling upon the assessee to produce the statement of accounts, balance sheet and the material supplied to the State Government for the purpose of deciding/fixing the final price/additional purchase price/SAP under Clause 5A ofthe Control Order, 1966 – As regards the non-members, the same can be dealt with and/or considered applying s.40A(2) of the Acti.e. assessing officer on the material on record has to determine whether the amount paid is excessive or unreasonable or not – Sugar Cane (Control) Order, 1966 – Clause 3 and 5A, Schedule – Essential Commodities Act, 1955.Sugar Cane (Control) Order, 1966: Clause 3 – Fixation of SMP – Determining factors – While fixing/determining the SMP under Clause 3 of the Control Order, 1966, the Central Governmentis required to consider the various aspects such as the cost of production of sugarcane; the return to the grower from alternative crops and the general trend of prices of agricultural commodities;the availability of sugar to the consumer at a fair price; the price at which sugar produced from sugarcane is sold by producers of sugar;and the recovery of sugar from sugarcane.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.R. Shah
Neutral Citation	2019 INSC 309
Petitioner	C.i.t. Bombay
Respondent	Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.
SCR	[2019] 4 S.C.R. 145
Judgement Date	2019-03-05
Case Number	8890

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

C.i.t. Bombay Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.

Please Log-in to view this content

Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala Vs. M/s. Travancore Sugar and Chemicals Ltd.

Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana Sangh Ltd. Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. Etc. Etc.

M/s W.t. Suren and Co. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay

Purtabpore Co. Ltd. Vs. Cane Commissioner of Bihar & Ors.

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 Vs. M/s Container Corporation of India Ltd.

National Co-operative Development Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-v

Jagdish Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. The C.i.t Lucknow

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-1 Vs. Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai Vs. M/s. T.v. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd.

C.i.t. Bombay Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.

C.i.t. Bombay Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Commissioner of Income Tax, Kerala Vs. M/s. Travancore Sugar and Chemicals Ltd.

Maharashtra Rajya Sahkari Sakkar Karkhana Sangh Ltd. Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. Etc. Etc.

M/s W.t. Suren and Co. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay

Purtabpore Co. Ltd. Vs. Cane Commissioner of Bihar & Ors.

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-1 Vs. M/s Container Corporation of India Ltd.

National Co-operative Development Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi-v

Jagdish Sugar Mills Ltd. Vs. The C.i.t Lucknow

Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-1 Vs. Godavari Sugar Mills Ltd.

Commissioner of Income Tax, Madurai Vs. M/s. T.v. Sundaram Iyengar and Sons Ltd.

C.i.t. Bombay Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.s.k. Ltd.