<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2004 (8) TMI 721 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189393</link>
    <description>A co-operative society&#039;s payments to members for sugarcane purchase price and khodki charges were held outside section 40A(2) because the provision targets specified related persons and does not, on its text and binding precedent, extend to such societies. The cane price and khodki charges were also treated as contractual business outgoings, not a statutory bonus or distribution of profits under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, so no part of those payments could be disallowed as bonus. The excess sugarcane price was characterised as a business cost arising as a charge on profits, not an appropriation of profits, under the regulated pricing framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2024 15:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454565" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 721 - ITAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189393</link>
      <description>A co-operative society&#039;s payments to members for sugarcane purchase price and khodki charges were held outside section 40A(2) because the provision targets specified related persons and does not, on its text and binding precedent, extend to such societies. The cane price and khodki charges were also treated as contractual business outgoings, not a statutory bonus or distribution of profits under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, so no part of those payments could be disallowed as bonus. The excess sugarcane price was characterised as a business cost arising as a charge on profits, not an appropriation of profits, under the regulated pricing framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189393</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>