9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Whether the assessee is entitled to deductions under sections 80HHA and 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as an industrial undertaking engaged in manufacture or production of articles or things. Analysis: The case involved a private limited company engaged in the business of engineering contractor, undertaking contract work with manufacturing of piles for construction of buildings using a special process known as "pressure piling." The company claimed to be entitled to deductions under sections 80J and 80HHA of the Act as an industrial company. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) accepted the claim for the assessment year 1982-83, but the Income-tax Officer considered the claim erroneous for the assessment year 1984-85. The Commissioner revised the order under section 263 of the Act, leading to appeals by both the Revenue and the assessee before the Tribunal. The Tribunal held in favor of the assessee, considering it an industrial undertaking entitled to deductions under sections 80HHA and 80J. Subsequently, the Department filed applications under section 256(1) of the Act, seeking the court's consideration on whether the Tribunal was justified in its decision. The court analyzed the legal provisions under sections 80HHA and 80J of the Act, which permit deductions for profits and gains from newly established industrial undertakings. Referring to a previous decision, the court emphasized that the term "industrial undertaking" must satisfy all requirements under the law to claim deductions. The court determined that the process of pressure piling undertaken by the assessee did not amount to manufacture, thus not meeting the criteria to be considered an industrial undertaking under the Act. It was established that activities like construction of buildings, roads, and dams do not qualify as manufacturing or production of articles as envisioned by the Act. Therefore, the court concluded that the Tribunal erred in allowing the deductions under sections 80HHA and 80J, ruling in favor of the Department and against the assessee. In conclusion, the court disposed of the case with no costs against the non-applicant for failing to appear. The court directed the transmission of the order to the Tribunal for further necessary action. The judgment clarified the legal position regarding the definition of an industrial undertaking and the eligibility for deductions under the relevant sections of the Income-tax Act, emphasizing the importance of meeting all statutory requirements to claim such benefits.
|
