Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the amounts collected by the Mandi Samitis as mandi shulk and development cess and transferred to the State Agricultural Produce Market Board under the statutory mandate constituted application of the Samitis' receipts so as to entitle them to exemption or allowance under the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The amounts were collected under the Mandi Act and, to the extent of 50% of mandi shulk and the entire development cess, were required to be remitted to the Board under the statute. The remittance was not voluntary and the amounts could not be retained by the Samitis. They were ultimately deployed for development of market yards, improvement of management, and better service to agricultural producers. The statutory scheme showed that the Board had an overriding title over the remitted amount, so the sums never formed part of the beneficial income available for the Samitis' own use.
Conclusion: The remitted amounts were application of the receipts of the Samitis and were allowable as such. The disallowance was rightly deleted by the appellate authorities, and the appeals failed.
Ratio Decidendi: Amounts compulsorily diverted by a statutory obligation to another authority under an overriding title constitute application of receipts and not taxable income available to the assessee.