BHOPAL SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED Vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BHOPAL
LAWS(SC)-1960-9-9
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADHYA PRADESH)
Decided on September 02,1960

BHOPAL SUGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED Appellant
VERSUS
INCOME TAX OFFICER,BHOPAL Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

GRAM PANCHAYAT,VIDUL OF VIDUL V. MULTI PURPOSE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY OF VIDUL [REFERRED]
SENAIRAM DOONGARMALL V. COMMR. OF INCOMETAX,ASSAM [REFERRED]
BIMAL CHAND VS. CHAIRMAN JIAGUNJ AZIMGUNJ MUNICIPALITY [REFERRED]



Cited Judgements :-

VASHIST BHARGAVA VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER SALARY CIRCLE [LAWS(DLH)-1974-12-10] [REFERRED]
NOKIA CORPORATION VS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(DLH)-2007-5-195] [REFERRED TO]
KANTILAL BABULAL VS. H C PATEL SALES TAX OFFICER SURAT [LAWS(GJH)-1963-12-13] [REFERRED TO]
CIBATUL LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-1979-2-5] [REFERRED]
AIR CONDITIONING SPECIALISTS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-1995-3-36] [REFERRED TO]
MILCENT APPLIANCES PVT LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2005-3-57] [REFERRED TO]
STERLITE INDUSTRIES INDIA LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2005-8-61] [REFERRED TO]
K R JADAV VS. DIRECTOR GENERAL AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE [LAWS(GJH)-2011-5-139] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. RAM BARAN RAM NATH [LAWS(ALL)-1974-2-16] [REFERRED TO]
RAMA KANT VS. BOARD OF REVENUE [LAWS(ALL)-2005-1-11] [REFERRED TO]
KISHANLAL HARICHARAN VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(APH)-1968-7-11] [REFERRED TO]
ANDHRA CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED VS. GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-1975-1-16] [REFERRED TO]
NABI OIL MILLS VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER CHITTOOR [LAWS(APH)-1976-9-6] [REFERRED TO]
N NAGENDRA RAO AND COMPANY VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-1977-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
ORIENT TRADING CO LTD VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(CAL)-1964-3-21] [REFERRED TO]
NARSINGHDAS JANKIDAS MOHTA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(MPH)-1964-9-7] [REFERRED TO]
HAZI NAZIR BHAT VS. STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY M P GWALIOR [LAWS(MPH)-1965-11-4] [REFERRED TO]
L R S MARAPPA VS. THIMME GOWDA [LAWS(KAR)-1981-3-36] [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN BARICK GENERAL EMTERPRISES PVT LTD VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(CAL)-1984-1-20] [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. PRADIP KUMAR SARAF [LAWS(CAL)-1992-6-24] [REFERRED TO]
Urmila Bharuka VS. Union of India UOI [LAWS(CAL)-1995-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL SATHAR HAJEE MOOSA SAIT DHARMASTHAPANAM VS. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(KER)-1980-8-26] [REFERRED TO]
Naveet Kumar Didwania LTD VS. Commr of Customs [LAWS(CAL)-1999-3-21] [REFERRED TO]
PUNALUR PAPER MILLS LTD VS. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE [LAWS(KER)-1988-4-8] [REFERRED TO]
KAROOR PANCHAYAT VS. STATE [LAWS(KER)-1995-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
ARCH DIOCESE OF VARAPOLY VS. AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(KER)-1996-9-19] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR SETHI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2012-1-5] [REFERRED TO]
RBF RIG CORPORATION MUMBAI VS. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [LAWS(SC)-2011-2-13] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BHOPAL VS. RALSON INDUSTRIES LTD [LAWS(SC)-2007-1-44] [REFERRED TO]
TOBACCO MANUFACTURERS INDIA LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX BIHAR PATNA [LAWS(SC)-1960-10-27] [REFERRED]
INDIAN COPPER CORPORATION LIMITED VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-1965-2-41] [REFERRED]
BISHNU RAM BORAH VS. PARAG SAIKIA [LAWS(SC)-1983-11-28] [REFERRED TO]
JAIN EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-1984-12-8] [REFERRED TO]
NARAYAN SADHASHIV MOHITE VS. BARODA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [LAWS(GJH)-1992-3-13] [REFERRED TO]
BAI JASUD WD O KANTILAL ALIAS FULCHAND ANOPCHAND VS. RATILAL ANOPCHAND SHAH [LAWS(GJH)-1996-8-65] [RELIED ON]
LAKSHMAN PRAKASH VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(ALL)-1962-7-22] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN HUME PIPE COMPANY LTD VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-1970-9-18] [REFERRED TO]
GEEP INDUSTRIAL SYNDICATE LTD VS. ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF C EX [LAWS(ALL)-1990-1-29] [REFERRED TO]
INDO NATIONAL LIMITED VS. COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES A P HYDERABAD [LAWS(APH)-2001-10-164] [REFERRED TO]
V S NARAYANAN NAIR VS. STO PALAI [LAWS(KER)-1971-2-7] [REFERRED TO]
MOOSA SAIT VS. AGRL INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(KER)-1980-8-9] [REFERRED TO]
DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER VS. PUSHPAN [LAWS(KER)-1983-9-17] [REFERRED TO]
SATYA PAL ANAND VS. S S TRIVEDI 6TH ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE INDORE [LAWS(MPH)-1978-1-20] [REFERRED TO]
THRIPOONITHURA MUNICIPALITY VS. ANSAL BUILDWELL LTD [LAWS(KER)-2008-8-58] [REFERRED TO]
YASHWANT MOTIRAM PATEL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2009-6-94] [REFERRED TO]
S A F ABBAS VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-1969-11-5] [REFERRED TO]
UCHAB KANWAR VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1977-1-36] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDANMAL VS. RAWATMAL [LAWS(RAJ)-1979-8-22] [REFERRED TO]
RANG LAL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-3-16] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. ITAT [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-3-87] [REFERRED TO]
REGIONAL COMMISSIONER VS. MAHESHWARI NURSINGH [LAWS(MPH)-2012-12-65] [REFERRED TO]
M/S.GERMAN TRADING CORPORATION VS. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2013-4-84] [REFERRED TO]
JAGDISH N. SHETTY VS. COMMISSIONER OF POLICE [LAWS(BOM)-2013-10-137] [REFERRED TO]
BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD VS. BIHAR ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION [LAWS(PAT)-2010-4-618] [REFERRED TO]
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION VS. MODERN GAS AGENCY [LAWS(MPH)-2012-12-108] [REFERRED TO]
MD.NASIRUDDIN ANSARI S/O MD.RAFIQUE ANSARI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2010-7-174] [REFERRED TO]
P. MADHAVAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-1973-8-27] [REFERRED TO]
THE GENERAL ASSURANCE SOCIETY LTD. VS. C.K. ABOOTY [LAWS(KER)-1970-11-37] [REFERRED TO]
RITZ THEATRE VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER [LAWS(DLH)-2010-8-329] [REFERRED TO]
SWAMI PREMANANDA ALIAS PREMKUMAR VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(MAD)-2008-12-376] [REFERRED TO]
ESSAR SHIPPING PORTS AND LOGISTICS LIMITED VS. COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (FAC) [LAWS(MAD)-2010-2-722] [REFERRED TO]
IFB INDUSTRIES LIMITED VS. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (AUDIT-5.3) [LAWS(KAR)-2014-7-112] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. KERALA RARE EARTHS & MINERALS LTD. [LAWS(KER)-2014-11-230] [REFERRED TO]
A. ZAHIR HUSSAIN VS. THE REGISTRAR, DEBT RECOVERY APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-4-18] [REFERRED TO]
RANVIR KUMAR AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ORS. [LAWS(PAT)-2015-7-25] [REFERRED TO]
U.P. FOREST CORPORATION VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-245] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH KUMAR AND ORS. VS. THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2015-11-19] [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL DHALI VS. A AND N ADMINISTRATION [LAWS(CAL)-1995-9-42] [REFERRED TO]
STATE TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, WEST BENGAL VS. JOYDEB SAMANTA & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-1994-5-19] [REFERRED TO]
M/S. KALIMPONG LAND AND BUILDING LTD. AND ANR. VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-1989-6-57] [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH JOSHI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-1995-7-111] [REFERRED TO]
VILLAGE PANCHAYAT OF VELIM VS. VALENTINE S K F REBELLO AND ANOTHER [LAWS(BOM)-1990-2-63] [REFERRED]
SK. KALOO @ KALOO VS. MOHAMMAD MOHIUDDIN [LAWS(CAL)-2004-6-79] [REFERRED TO]
MOHLA VS. MAYA CHAND [LAWS(P&H)-1968-8-46] [REFERRED]
M/S. AVECO TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2017-8-37] [REFERRED TO]
PRATHIBHA JEWELLERY HOUSE REP VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX [LAWS(KAR)-2017-11-163] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY VS. LALTUN THAKUR [LAWS(PAT)-2016-11-159] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY DYEING & MFG. CO. LTD. VS. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE [LAWS(SC)-2019-12-26] [REFERRED TO]
HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD. VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-260] [REFERRED TO]
INDRAJ SINGH VS. KASHI RAM [LAWS(ALL)-2020-6-193] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. FELICIA MARIA JOSEPH [LAWS(KER)-2021-3-73] [REFERRED TO]
REAL ESTATE REGULATORY AUTHORITY CHHATTISGARH VS. REAL ESTATE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [LAWS(CHH)-2021-3-77] [REFERRED TO]
SURAJ NARREDU VS. BANGLORE TUF CLUB LIMITED [LAWS(KAR)-2021-11-111] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This is an appeal on a certificate under Art. 133 of the Constitution. The short question for decision is whether the learned Judicial Commissioner of Bhopal rightly dismissed a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution made by the Bhopal Sugar Industries, Limited, hereinafter referred to as the appellant company, praying for the issue of an appropriate order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamuus to compel the Income-tax Officer, Bhopal, respondent herein, to carry out certain directions given by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, to the said officer in an appeal preferred by the appellant company from an order of assessment made against it by the respondent.
(2.)The relevant facts are these. The appellant company carries on the business of manufacturing and selling in various grades and quantities. It has its factory at Sehore which was formerly in the Bhopal State and is now situate in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It purchased sugarcane from local cultivators and also grew its own sugarcane in farms situate in that State, such sugarcane being used for its manufacture of sugar. During the year of account ending on September 30, 1950, the appellant company purchased 7,72,217 maunds of sugarcane from local cultivators at various purchasing centres, 14 in number, situate at a distance of about 8 to 22 miles from its factory. The price paid was Rs. 1-4-6 per maund, that being the price fixed by the then State of Bhopal. The average cost of transporting the sugarcane from the various centres to the factory was stated to be Rs. 0-4-9 per maund. During the same period the appellant company grew its own sugarcane to the extent of 6,78,490 maunds and brought the same along with the cultivators' sugarcane to its factory for manufacturing sugar. For the sugarcane grown on its own farms the appellant company claimed Rs. 1-13-0 per maund as its market value (including Rs. 0-4-9 as average transport charges), the total market value for 6,78,490 maunds thus coming to Rs. 12,29,763. The appellant company deducted from the aforesaid market value a sum of Rs. 9,77,772 as agricultural expenses, namely, expenses of harvesting, loading etc. and claimed the balance of Rs. 2,51,991 as agricultural income to be deducted from the computation of its total income for the assessment year 1951-52 . The respondent accepted the figure of Rs. 9,77,772 as agricultural expenses but computed the market value of 6,78,490 maunds of sugarcane grown on the appellants company's own farms at Rs. 9,33,000 at the rate of Rs. 1-6-0 per maund; thus according to this computation there was a loss of Rs. 44,772 and the respondent held in his assessment order that the appellant company was not entitled to claim any deduction of agricultural income for the assessment year.
(3.)The appellant company then appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Jubalpore, who determined the market value of the sugarcane grown on the appellant company's own farms at Rs. 10,07,132 at the rate of Rs. 1-7-9 per maund. This resulted in an agricultural income of Rs. 29,360, which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed to be deducted from the total income of the appellant company.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.