<?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>2025 (3) TMI 27 - ITAT PUNE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766642</link>
    <description>Concessional sale of sugar by a co-operative factory required fresh factual examination because the record did not fully address the Supreme Court&#039;s directions in Krishna SSK or the Sugar Commissioner&#039;s circular under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The Tribunal noted that the enquiry had to cover whether the concession was backed by a State Government resolution, whether it reflected an established industry custom, and the basis for fixing the quantity sold at concessional rates. As these matters were unresolved, the deletion of the addition was not finally sustained and the disputed addition was restored for de novo adjudication; the Revenue succeeded only for statistical purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2025 08:25:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=802821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 27 - ITAT PUNE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766642</link>
      <description>Concessional sale of sugar by a co-operative factory required fresh factual examination because the record did not fully address the Supreme Court&#039;s directions in Krishna SSK or the Sugar Commissioner&#039;s circular under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The Tribunal noted that the enquiry had to cover whether the concession was backed by a State Government resolution, whether it reflected an established industry custom, and the basis for fixing the quantity sold at concessional rates. As these matters were unresolved, the deletion of the addition was not finally sustained and the disputed addition was restored for de novo adjudication; the Revenue succeeded only for statistical purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766642</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>