Revenue appeal dismissed, AO's profit addition deletion upheld. Tribunal cites consistent findings on steam sale income.

The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the deletion of the addition made by the AO on account of profit from the sale of steam was upheld. The Tribunal based its decision on consistent findings in the assessee's favor in earlier years, establishing that no real income accrued from the supply of steam to SSL, and the conversion agreement was not approved by PICUP.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Deletion of addition made by the AO on account of profit from the sale of steam.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deletion of Addition on Account of Profit from Sale of Steam:
The primary issue in this appeal is whether the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 5,35,56,896/- made by the AO on account of profit from the sale of steam. The AO had noticed that the assessee had shown the production of steam, which was supplied to SBEC Sugar Limited (SSL) free of cost, unlike in earlier years when it was sold at Rs. 75/- per ton. The AO considered the sale of steam at Rs. 236/- per ton, resulting in an addition of Rs. 5,35,56,896/- to the total income of the assessee.

The CIT(A) deleted the addition by following the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for earlier years, specifically Assessment Years 2003-04 to 2009-10, where the issue was decided in favor of the assessee. The CIT(A) noted that the Tribunal had consistently held that no real income accrued to the assessee from the supply of steam to SSL, as SSL had stopped making payments for steam since October 2001, and the conversion agreement between SSL and the assessee was not approved by PICUP.

The Tribunal, in the current appeal, observed that the issue had been consistently decided in favor of the assessee in earlier years, including A.Y. 2014-15, where the Tribunal had dismissed the Revenue's appeal by following its order for A.Y. 2007-08. The Tribunal reiterated that the CIT(A) had correctly followed the earlier decisions and noted that the Revenue had not pointed to any distinguishing feature in the facts of the current year compared to earlier years. Additionally, the Revenue had not provided any material to demonstrate that the ITAT orders in the assessee's own case for earlier years had been stayed, set aside, or overruled by a higher judicial forum.

The Tribunal concluded that no interference with the order of the CIT(A) was warranted for the year under consideration and dismissed the ground of the Revenue.

Conclusion:
The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the deletion of the addition made by the AO on account of profit from the sale of steam was upheld. The Tribunal's decision was based on the consistent findings in the assessee's favor in earlier years, where it was established that no real income accrued from the supply of steam to SSL, and the conversion agreement was not approved by PICUP.

---