https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103912 Under the Coffee Act, 1942, the pool fund was treated as distinct from the general fund, and growers had no proprietary right in its balance beyond their statutory entitlement to payment. On that basis, the Board could apply the pool fund to meet its purchase-tax liability without defeating any enforceable growers' right. At the same time, section 34 required payments to registered growers on a reasonable basis, and the Board remained bound to ensure a fair return for coffee delivered to the surplus pool. The governing standard was payment covering cost of production with a reasonable profit, which the Board was directed to continue. en-us Tue, 22 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jan 2017 14:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103912 Under the Coffee Act, 1942, the pool fund was treated as distinct from the general fund, and growers had no proprietary right in its balance beyond their statutory entitlement to payment. On that basis, the Board could apply the pool fund to meet its purchase-tax liability without defeating any enforceable growers' right. At the same time, section 34 required payments to registered growers on a reasonable basis, and the Board remained bound to ensure a fair return for coffee delivered to the surplus pool. The governing standard was payment covering cost of production with a reasonable profit, which the Board was directed to continue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 22 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=103912