Rajarambapu Patil SSK Ltd, Sangli V. ACIT, Sangli

MA 108/PUN/2022

AI Insights

The case involves Rajaram Bapu Patil Sahakari Sakhar Kharkhana Ltd., which filed twin miscellaneous applications seeking recall/rectification of a previous order that restored the issue of the allowability of excess sugarcane price paid to cane growers back to the Assessing Officer. The Tribunal's earlier decision was based on the Supreme Court's judgment in CIT vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd., which the assessee argued did not consider certain grounds related to the prices paid by private sector sugar factories. However, the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's argument, citing the binding nature of the Supreme Court's decision under Article 141 of the Constitution of India.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 131945 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 16-02-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: DismissedDismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-02-2023
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 28-11-2019
• Other Referred Cases: CIT vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd.
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A” : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.D. PADMASHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.Nos.107& 108/PUN/2022 Arising out of ITA.Nos.832&1858/PUN./2012 Assessment Years – 2007-2008& 2009-2010 Rajaram Bapu Patil SahakariSakharKharkhana Ltd., Sakharale, Islampur, Dist. Sangli-415414. PAN: AAAAR0790D vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Solapur (Applicant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Prasanna Joshi For Revenue : Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of Hearing : 17.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.02.2023 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. These assessee’s twin miscellaneous applications M.A.Nos.107&108/PUN./2022 in the corresponding main appeals ITA.Nos.832 & 1858/PUN./2012; respectively, for assessment years 2007-2008 & 2009-2010 respectively, u/s.254(2) of the of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), seeks to recall/rectify our common order dated 01.05.2019 restoring the issue of allowability of the alleged excess sugarcane price paid to members/cane growers back to the Assessing Officer for his afresh appropriate adjudication in light of CIT vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd., and others [2019] 103 taxmann.com 57 (SC). 2 MA.Nos.104 & 105/PUN./2022 Heard both the parties. Case files perused. 2. Learned counsel’s sole substantive plea raised during the course of hearing is that our order in issue has not adjudicated the allowability of sugarcane price paid to the cane growers vis-à-vis that reimbursed by the private sector sugar mills engaged in the very activity. Learned counsel vehemently argued that such a non-adjudication of the corresponding substantive ground raised in the main appeals indeed amounts to an apparent error on record requiring rectification u/s.254(2) of the Act. 3. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s pleadings and find no merit therein. It emerges during the course of hearing that this tribunal’s recent coordinate bench’s order dated 03.02.2023 in similar cases involving the concerned assessee’s MA.Nos.65 to 67/PUN./2022 in ITA.Nos.1290 & 1291/PUN./2012 and CIT(A)'s O.No.03/PUN./2016 Shree Someshwar SSK Ltd. Tal. Baramati vs. DCIT, Circle-6, Pune, dated 03.02.2023 has rejected the very arguments as under : “2. The ld. AR submitted that the Tribunal fell in error in deciding the issue of `Excessive sugar cane price’ restoring the matter to the file of Assessing Officer (AO) to be decided in consonance with the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd. 3 MA.Nos.104 & 105/PUN./2022 (2019) 103 taxmann.com 57 (SC). The point taken up by the assessees in these M.As. is that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, while deciding the issue, did not take into consideration the subject matter of Ground No.4 raised by the assessee in its appeal in ITA Nos.1290 /PUN/2012 and such ground in other appeals, being, that the ld. CIT(A) erred in ignoring prices paid by private sector sugar factories, which are not disallowed, while allowing only SMP+ 5A as cost of sugarcane purchased to the appellant. It was, therefore, urged that the Tribunal order be rectified accordingly. The ld. DR strongly opposed the ld. AR’s contention. 3. Having heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record, it is seen that the issue of `Excessive sugar cane price’ in the batch of appeals disposed of vide impugned order has been determined in terms of the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd. (supra). The contention of the ld. AR that the Hon’ble Supreme Court did not consider certain contentions before deciding the issue in the way it has been decided and hence, the rectification should be carried out, in our considered opinion, is farfetched and devoid of merit. Once a particular issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a particular manner, no one can be allowed to argue that the Hon’ble Supreme 4 MA.Nos.104 & 105/PUN./2022 Court did not determine the issue correctly. Article 141 of the Constitution of India makes the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court binding on all courts in the territory of India leaving no scope for anyone pointing out some mistake in any judicial proceedings. As the Bench passed the order u/s 254(1) of the Act in accordance with the law declared by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, we hold that no mistake, much less a mistake apparent from record, can be traced in it requiring rectification.” 3.1. We thus see no merit in the assessee’s instant miscellaneous application in light of learned coordinate bench’s above extracted adjudication on the very issue. Rejected accordingly. 4. These assessee’s miscellaneous applications are dismissed in above terms. A copy of this common order be placed in the respective case files. Order pronounced in the open Court on 17 th February, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (GD PADMASHALI) (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Pune, Dated 17 th February, 2023 VBP/- 5 MA.Nos.104 & 105/PUN./2022 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The appellant 2. The respondent 3. Ld. CIT(A) 4. Ld. Pr. CIT 5. DR ITAT Pune-A Bench, Pune 6. Guard File. //BY Order// Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Pune Benches, Pune.