2024 (12) TMI 1345

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Associates For the Respondent : Mr. Karthik Ranganathan Senior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT DR. ANITA SUMANTH., J. This Tax Case (Appeal) has been filed by the assessee/appellant challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (in short 'Tribunal') for assessment year (AY) 2004-05. The substantial questions of law admitted for resolution are as follows: ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....' as per Schedule III of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (in short 'Act') are different commodities or whether they are one and the same for the purpose of determining taxability of the profits from sale of jaggery. 3. The Tribunal has decided the issue adverse to the assessee holding that profits from sale of jaggery will be taxable, as such activity has no nexus with ag....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hird parties was of sugarcane and not jaggery. 6. We also find that no ground has been taken, either before the first and second appellate authorities, pursuing the stand that the commodity sold was sugarcane and not jaggery. The assessee has only been harping on the distinction between 'gur' and 'jaggery', contending that the two are different commodities. 7. The specific po....