TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1992 (9) TMI 15
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....duction of Rs. 39,09,850 under section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(iv) in respect of the sale of commodities to non-members ? (3) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in placing the onus on the Department of indicating the basis for ascertainment of the intention of the assessee under the provisions of section 80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Act at the time of the purchase of eligible commodities ? (4) Whether the Tribunal was correct in rejecting the contention of the Department that the intent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r a direction to the Tribunal to refer certain questions of law arising out of the very order. Before us, a notice of motion is pressed only with relation to question No. 5 in the original application, viz.: " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in granting deduction of the entire gross profit arising from the business attributable to the activities specified in section 80P(2)(a)(iv) instead of confining such relief to the net profit arrived at by deducting the proportionate expenditure from such gross profit ?" By consent of parties, the notice of motion is also heard along with this reference. The basic facts are: The assessee, Vidarbha Co-operative Marketing Society L....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(iv)-irrespective of the original intention at the time of purchase which is impossible to find out in case of societies which carry on even other business. (ii) "profits and gains" contemplated under the provisions means income as computed under section 29 of the Act and hence the whole profit without computation is not entitled to be deducted. In view of the said decision, the two referred questions are answered as under: (i) Question No. 1-In the negative and in favour of the Revenue. (ii) Question No. 2-Not necessary. This takes us to the consideration of the notice of motion. As indicated earlier, even the question sought to be referred as a question of law is answered by us in favour of the Revenue in the said decision.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cedural provisions must be, to borrow the words of Justice Holmes, "washed with cynical acid". Indeed, the existing procedural system of reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act is completely outdated and counter-productive. Time has come to streamline the procedure, but that is a different part of the story. Suffice it to say that in this matter this drudgery be not gone into. We, therefore, proceed to record the answer to the question without calling for the statement from the Tribunal. We may notice at this stage that in the case of State of Orissa v. Mahabir Prasad Agrawalla [1990] 79 STC 163, the High Court of Orissa had also adopted a similar course though in the context of the provisions for reference under the Orissa Sal....