https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469915 Excess cane price paid to farmers over FRP was restored to the first appellate authority for de novo adjudication because the appellate stage had not examined the merits and the assessee had sought relief under section 155(19). Sale of sugar at concessional rate to members was also remanded because the dispute required the factual particulars identified by the Supreme Court in sugar cooperative matters, including member-wise supply and production data, and those materials were not on record. Both grounds were treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with no final decision on the merits. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Jul 2026 20:43:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469915 Excess cane price paid to farmers over FRP was restored to the first appellate authority for de novo adjudication because the appellate stage had not examined the merits and the assessee had sought relief under section 155(19). Sale of sugar at concessional rate to members was also remanded because the dispute required the factual particulars identified by the Supreme Court in sugar cooperative matters, including member-wise supply and production data, and those materials were not on record. Both grounds were treated as allowed for statistical purposes, with no final decision on the merits. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469915