Held that entire amount of difference between statutory minimum price and statutory additional price fixed for sugarcane per se could not be said to be an appropriation of profit; however, component of profit which would be a part of final determination of additional purchase price fixed under clause 5A of sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 would certainly be an appropriation of profit and, thus, remaining amount was to be allowed as business expenditure. Matter remanded. (AY. 2011-12, 2013-14)
Shree Khedut Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandi Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 199 ITD 173 (Surat) (Trib.) Shree Mahuva Pradesh Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandi Ltd. v. ITO (2023) 199 ITD 117 (Surat) (Trib.) Shree Sayan Vibhag Sahakari Khand Udyog Mandi Ltd. v. DCIT (2023) 199 ITD 161 (Surat) (Trib.)
S. 37(1) : Business expenditure-Sugarcane, purchase-Difference between statutory minimum price and statutory additional price fixed for sugarcane-Component of profit which would be a part of final determination of additional purchase price fixed under clause 5A of sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966-Remaining amount was to be allowed as business expenditure-Matter remanded. [Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966, Clause 5A]