https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438825 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of purchase of sugarcane as prior period expenses, as the payments were made after the determination of Fair Market Price by the Government. The Tribunal also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of sugarcane advance written off as not recoverable, as the amount represented advances given by the assessee to members and was not claimed as a deduction in earlier years. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed as no fallacy was found in the CIT(A)'s findings. en-us Wed, 07 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Jun 2023 08:56:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438825 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of purchase of sugarcane as prior period expenses, as the payments were made after the determination of Fair Market Price by the Government. The Tribunal also upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of sugarcane advance written off as not recoverable, as the amount represented advances given by the assessee to members and was not claimed as a deduction in earlier years. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed as no fallacy was found in the CIT(A)'s findings. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438825