((-1-)) HVN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO. 1457 OF 2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus Shree Warana Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. ... Respondent Mr. B.M. Chatterjee with Ms. P.P. Bhosale and Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellants. Mr. S.S. Patwardhan for Respondent. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO REBELLO REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: JANUARY 09, 2008 DATED: JANUARY 09, 2008 DATED: JANUARY 09, 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. . The tax incidence is only of Rs.1.47 lakh. However, as the questions are covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court and of this Court, the appeal is admitted on the following questions : (a) Whether the ITAT, Pune Bench, Pune is right in holding that there is no mistake apparent from the record in the impugned order of the ITAT dt. 2/8/2004 passed in ITA No. 563/PN/1995 for assessment year 1993-94 in case of DCIT SR-1, Kop. Vs. Shri. Warana SSK Ltd., Kolhapur when the decision of the ITAT dated 2/8/2004 on the ((-2-)) point of taxability of Area Development Fund and Cane Development Fund is directly against the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment dated 8/9/2004 passed in the case of Siddheshwar SSK Ltd. Vs. CIT Kolhapur and Others - 270 ITR 1? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in treating that the rectification application filed u/s.254(2) was a review of its own order, whereas the rectification of an order passed by the ITAT in accordance with the Hon’ble Supreme Court judgment, even if passed substantially, is well within the purview of sec.254(2)?" . In so far as cane development fund is concerned, the issue has to be answered in favour of assessee and against Revenue. In so far as Area Development fund is concerned, considering the judgment of the Supreme Court as noted by our Bench of this court in CIT Vs. Malegaon Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. 279 ITR 19 BOM the matter is remanded back to the tribunal for fresh determination according to law. The appeal allowed accordingly. No order as to costs. ((-3-)) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.) (F.I.REBELLO, J.)