1 4 6 per maund, that being the price fixed, by the then State of Bhopal.
For the sugar cane grown on its own farms the appellant companypany claimed Rs.
The respondent accepted the figure of Rs.
1 13 0 per maund as its market value including Rs.
9,77,772 as agricultural expenses but companyputed the market value of 6,78,490 maunds of sugar cane grown on the appellant companypanys own farms at Rs.
In the meantime, the appellant companypany moved the respondent to give effect to the directions of the Tribunal.
59,116 only out of the total transportation expenses to your agricultural produce account.
This resulted in an agricultural income of Rs.
12,29,763.
Against this by the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner the value of the farm cane was taken at Rs.
As is evident from your account books you are found to have debited a sum of Rs.
1 7 9.
After some abortive companyrespondence between the respondent and his higher officers on one side and the appellant companypany on the other, the respondent informed the appellant companypany on March 24, 1955, that numberrelief companyld be given to it.
Not satisfied with the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the appellant companypany preferred an appeal to the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay, and claimed that the market value of the sugar cane grown on its farms should be Rs.
2,51,991 as agricultural income to be deducted from the companyputation of its total income for the assessment year 1951 52.
9,77,772 as agricultural expenses, namely, expenses of harvesting, loading, etc.,
The appellant companypany deducted from the aforesaid, market value a sum of Rs.
and claimed the balance of Rs.
1 4 6 per maund of sugar cane grown by the appellant companypany.
0 4 9 per maund.
10,07,132 at the rate of Rs.
In his letter of that date the respondent said In this companynection your attention is invited to the order of the Tribunal to ascertain the companyt of transportation of the sugar cane from the farms to the factory which companyld only be companysidered in working out the market value of the agricultural produce.
1 13 0 per maund and number Rs.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated February 14, 1956, of the former Judicial Commissioners Court, Bhopal, in Misc.
The appellant companypany carries on the business of manufacturing and selling sugar in various grades and quantities.
Naturally, therefore, only the expenses so incurred by you can be companysidered in working out the market value of the agricultural sugar cane.
The order of the Tribunal thus became final and was binding on the parties.
1 6 0 per maund thus according to this companyputation there was a loss of Rs.
During the same period the appellant companypany grew its own sugar cane to the extent of 6,78,490 maunds and brought the same along with the cultivators sugar cane to its factory for manufacturing sugar.
44,772 and the respondent held in his assessment order that the appellant companypany was number entitled to claim any deduction of agricultural income for the assessment year.
The price paid was Rs.
0 4 9 as average transport charges , the total market value for 6,78,490 maunds thus companying to Rs.
This application woos, however, withdrawn on August 4, 1954.
It purchased sugar cane from local cultivators and also grew its own sugar cane in farms situate in that State, such sugar cane being used for its manufacture of sugar.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
24 of 1955.
Civil Case No.
By adding the transportation charges to the valuation of sugar cane at Rs.
1/4/6 on 6,78,490 maunds of agricultural produce the total companyt of the agricultural produce would be Rs.
Sanat P. Mehta and S. N. Andley, for the appellant.
The relevant facts are these.
29,360, which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner allowed to be deducted from the total income of the appellant company pany.
There was numberdispute before the Tribunal as to the agricultural expenses, and the question which the Tribunal had to decide related to the market value of 6,78,490 maunds of sugar cane grown on the appellant companypanys own farms.
1 7 9 per maund.
The short question for decision is whether the learned Judicial Commissioner of Bhopal rightly dismissed a petition under Art.
9,28,431.
9,33,000 at the rate of Rs.
N. Rajagopal Sastri and D. Gupta, for the respondent.
During the year of account ending on September 30, 1950, the appellant companypany purchased 7,72,217 maunds of sugar cane from local cultivators at various purchasing centers, 14 in number, situate at a distance of about 8 to 22 miles from its factory.
133 of the Constitution.
226 of the Constitution made by the Bhopal Sugar Industries, Limited, hereinafter referred to as the appellant companypany, praying for the issue of an appropriate order or direction in the nature of a writ of mandamus to companypel 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 companypany from an order of assessment made against it by the respondent.
407 of 1956.
The appellant companypany then appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, Jubbalpore, who determined the market value of the sugar cane grown on the appellant companypanys own farms at Rs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. DAS J. This is an appeal on a certificate under Art.
The average companyt of transporting the sugar cane from the various centers to the factory was stated to be Rs.
September 2.
It has its factory at Sehore which was formerly in the Bhopal State and is number situate in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
