Tribunal remits tax issues for fresh consideration, condones delay in cross objection filing.

The Tribunal allowed both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objection for statistical purposes, remitting the issues to the AO for fresh consideration in accordance with relevant Supreme Court judgments. The delay in presenting the cross objection was condoned, and the excessive sugarcane price payment and concessional sugar rates issues were remitted for reconsideration in line with the law articulated in the Supreme Court judgments.

---

---

Issues:
1. Delay in presenting cross objection by the assessee before the Tribunal.
2. Sustenance of addition towards excessive sugarcane price paid to members and non-members.
3. Giving sugar to members and non-members at concessional rates.

Issue 1: Delay in presenting cross objection
The assessee filed a cross objection with a delay of 25 days, supported by an affidavit for condonation of delay. The Tribunal condoned the delay and admitted the cross objection for hearing on merits.

Issue 2: Sustenance of addition towards excessive sugarcane price
The AO observed that the assessee paid excessive cane price above the Fair and Remunerative Price (FRP) fixed by the Government to members and non-members. The AO disallowed the excessive payment as not wholly and exclusively for business purposes. The CIT(A) upheld the addition. The Tribunal referred to a recent Supreme Court judgment which elaborately dealt with similar issues. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the AO for reconsideration in line with the law articulated in the judgment. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the AO for fresh consideration.

Issue 3: Giving sugar at concessional rates
The AO made an addition for the difference between market price and concessional price at which sugar was given to farmers and cane growers. The CIT(A) directed the AO to quantify the disallowance. The Tribunal referred to a Supreme Court judgment which directed consideration of various factors to determine if selling sugar at concessional rates is appropriation of profit. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the AO for fresh consideration in line with the Supreme Court's directions.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objection for statistical purposes, remitting the issues to the AO for fresh consideration in accordance with the relevant Supreme Court judgments.

---