✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 24 Feb 2011

Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Doaba Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd

HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A No. 847 of 2010ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

Case at a glance

Outcome

Dismissed

Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Vivek Sethi, Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar in I.T.A. No.503/(ASR/2000 for the assessment year 1998-99 proposing following substantial questions of law:-

I. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in law in expressing the plain divergence from the earlier view held by the Divisional Bench of the jurisdictional High Court in Karnal Co- operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (2001) 253 ITR 659 (P&H) as held in the case of the The Budhewal Co-operative Sugar Ltd. Vs CIT 225 CTR 261 (P&H)? II. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances and in law, a co-operative society, engaged in the business I.T.A. No.847 of 2010 2 of manufacturing and sale of sugar out of sugarcane can be said to be engaged in the marketing of the agricultural produce of its members within the meaning of section 80-P(2)(a)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

Learned counsel for the revenue fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by judgment of this Court in The Budhewal Co-operative Sugar Ltd. v. CIT 225 CTR 261. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE February 24, 2011 ashwani ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Income Tax Act, 1961.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 24 Feb 2011. The bench was ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, AJAY KUMAR MITTAL.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A No. 847 of 2010). ← Search more judgments