Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS Respondent: KOTHARI SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD.
Court Name: Madras High Court Judge(s): K. P. Sivasubramaniam, K. A. Thanikkachalam Title: COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs KOTHARI SUGARS AND CHEMICALS LTD. Case No.: Tax Cases Nos. 156 of 158 Date of Judgment:1997-07-29 Reported As: 2002 PTD 1681 Result: Reference. Answered
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT K. A . THANIKKACHALAM , J.---At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following common question for the opinion of this Court for the assessment years 1978-79 to 1980-81, under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the amount set apart for credit to the 'molasses storage fund account' is an allowable deduction in the computation of income?" A similar case came up for consideration before this Court in CIT v. Salem Cooperative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1998) 229 ITR 285, wherein this Court held that the amount set apart for "molasses storage fund" is an allowable deduction. Inasmuch as the order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with the above said decision of this Court, we answer the question referred to us in the affirmative and against the Department. No costs. d.