https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17760 The Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's claims regarding additional cane price payments to sugarcane growers, upholding the disallowance of a substantial portion of the claimed amount. It found that the increase in cane price was not justified by genuine business needs but was aimed at tax avoidance, leading to deprivation of Revenue. The Tribunal concluded that the petitioner's actions were disproportionate, unreasonable, and not bona fide, serving as a means to enhance capital without fulfilling tax obligations. The decision affirmed that the additional cane price payments were not legitimate and constituted tax avoidance. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Sep 2009 16:14:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17760 The Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's claims regarding additional cane price payments to sugarcane growers, upholding the disallowance of a substantial portion of the claimed amount. It found that the increase in cane price was not justified by genuine business needs but was aimed at tax avoidance, leading to deprivation of Revenue. The Tribunal concluded that the petitioner's actions were disproportionate, unreasonable, and not bona fide, serving as a means to enhance capital without fulfilling tax obligations. The decision affirmed that the additional cane price payments were not legitimate and constituted tax avoidance. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17760