1990 (11) TMI 48 - HC - Income Tax

Company Depreciation Developement Rebate New Industrial Undertaking Previous Year Special Deduction

Summary

Issues:
1. Determination of whether there was material before the Tribunal to hold that the promoters intended to float a company from January 1969.
2. Justification of the Tribunal's decision regarding the profit or loss of the promoters being considered as the profit or loss of the company for the relevant period.
3. Assessment of whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in setting aside the assessment for the years 1971-72 and 1972-73.
4. Examination of whether the Appellate Tribunal was correct in allowing the assessee-company to claim development rebate and relief under section 80J.
5. Evaluation of the Tribunal's decision regarding the entitlement of the assessee company to depreciation at the rate of 15% for manufacturing artificial silk.

Analysis:

1. The Tribunal had sufficient material to hold that the promoters intended to float a company from January 1969 based on documents such as a letter from J. K. Synthetics Ltd. and an agreement between the promoters. The Tribunal's inference was supported by legal precedents, and the decision was found to be reasonable and in line with past judgments. The court upheld the Tribunal's finding, citing the fiduciary relationship between promoters and the company.

2. The Tribunal's decision to require two separate assessments for the period in question, January 1, 1969, to December 31, 1969, and January 1, 1970, to June 30, 1970, was deemed correct. The court clarified the relevant assessment years and directed the Income-tax Officer to redo the assessments accordingly. This decision was accepted by the assessee and not contested.

3. The Appellate Tribunal's decision to set aside the assessments for the years 1971-72 and 1972-73 was upheld, and the Income-tax Officer was directed to redo the assessments in compliance with the Tribunal's findings. The court affirmed this decision without any further modifications.

4. Once it was established that the promoters were conducting business on behalf of the assessee-company and the company adopted their actions, the assessee was entitled to claim development rebate and relief under section 80J. This entitlement was based on the alignment of business activities and the legal implications of the promoters' actions.

5. The Tribunal's determination that the assessee company, engaged in knitting nylon yarn into cloth, was conducting a business in artificial silk was supported by legal precedent. The court agreed with the Tribunal's interpretation, referencing a relevant decision under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, and concluded that the activity qualified as a business in art silk. Consequently, the assessee was entitled to depreciation at the higher rate of 15%.

In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of the assessee on all issues, affirming the Tribunal's decisions and providing necessary clarifications for the assessments to be redone in accordance with the findings.