Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

1971 (2) TMI 20

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng October 28, 1960, relevant to the assessment year 1961-62, it purchased its requirement of sugar-cane from sugar-cane growers' co-operative societies. In its accounts, which it maintained on the mercantile system, it debited the price of the sugar-cane. It also debited a sum of Rs. 2,05,787 as the additional price payable by it under clause 3-A of paragraph 3 of S.R.O. No. 1863, dated August 27, 1955, issued by the Central Government under section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The provision, as set out in the statement of the case, reads thus : " Where a producer of sugar or his agent purchases any sugar-cane from a grower of sugar-cane or a growers' co-operative society, the producer shall, in addition to the price fixed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r requiring the assessee to pay the additional amount. He observed that such an order lay in the discretion of the Government and no such order had yet been made. Thereafter, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, taking the view that the law did not contemplate any order by the Cane Commissioner or other authority before the liability to pay the additional price arose. Though the liability was an existing liability, the amount payable was a fixed amount computed by reference to the provisions of the Schedule and therefore the assessee was right in its claim to deduction. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, this reference has been made to this court. It appears from the re....