Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

D.C.M. Ltd. Vs. Cit

D.C.M. Ltd. vs Cit

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Nov 29, 2004
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/707669

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Decided On
Case Number
IT Appal Nos. 714 & 716 of 2004 29 November 2004
Subject
Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Head Note: INCOME TAX Income--CHARGEABILITYAmount credited in molasses storage fundHeld: Sum credited to molasses storage fund out of the sale proceeds of molasses was not to be included in the income of the assessed. Income Tax Act, 1961 s.4 In the Delhi High Court B.C. Patel, CJ. & Badar Durrez Ahmed, J. -

Key legal issue
Direct Taxation

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

D.C.M. Ltd.

Advocate S.K. Aggarwal,;for the assessed;R.D. Jolly &; Rajiv Awasthi,;for the Revenue

Respondent

Cit

Legal References

Reported In
[2005]145TAXMAN124(Delhi)

Excerpt

head note: income tax income--chargeabilityamount credited in molasses storage fundheld: sum credited to molasses storage fund out of the sale proceeds of molasses was not to be included in the income of the assessed. income tax act, 1961 s.4 in the delhi high court b.c. patel, cj. & badar durrez ahmed, j. - b.c. patel, cj. in these two appeals for the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, the following question is sought to be raised by the assessed:'whether the tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum credited to molasses storage fund out of the sale proceeds of molasses was to be included in the income of the appellant?'(in ita no. 714/2004 for the assessment year 1988-89 the sum credited to molasses storage fund was rs. 7,61,581 and in ita no. 716/2004 for the assessment year 1987-88 the amount was rs. 6,23,872).2. there is no dispute that the appellant, in respect of different assessment years, approached this court by preferring appeals being ita nos. 588/ 2004,1/2002 and 99/2002. in those appeals the identical question (except for different amounts) was raised. those appeals were decided by this court on 1-10-2004.3. accordingly, these appeals are admitted raising the said question. as the identical issue has been decided, at the request of the learned counsel, we are taking up these appeals for final disposal today itself.4. since the answer has already been given in favor of the assessed and against the revenue in ita nos. 588/2004 and other appeals decided on 1-10-2004, we are of the opinion that there is no reason as to why the question in these appeals should not be answered in favor of the assessed and against the revenue. accordingly, the appeals are allowed with no orders as to costs. answered accordingly.

Full Judgment

B.C. Patel, CJ.

In these two appeals for the assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89, the following question is sought to be raised by the assessed:

'Whether the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the sum credited to Molasses Storage Fund out of the sale proceeds of molasses was to be included in the income of the appellant?'

(In ITA No. 714/2004 for the assessment year 1988-89 the sum credited to Molasses Storage Fund was Rs. 7,61,581 and in ITA No. 716/2004 for the assessment year 1987-88 the amount was Rs. 6,23,872).

2. There is no dispute that the appellant, in respect of different assessment years, approached this court by preferring appeals being ITA Nos. 588/ 2004,1/2002 and 99/2002. In those appeals the identical question (except for different amounts) was raised. Those appeals were decided by this court on 1-10-2004.

3. Accordingly, these appeals are admitted raising the said question. As the identical issue has been decided, at the request of the learned counsel, we are taking up these appeals for final disposal today itself.

4. Since the answer has already been given in favor of the assessed and against the revenue in ITA Nos. 588/2004 and other appeals decided on 1-10-2004, we are of the opinion that there is no reason as to why the question in these appeals should not be answered in favor of the assessed and against the revenue. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed with no orders as to costs. Answered accordingly.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial