9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
1. Deduction of purchase tax on goods not sold in the year. 2. Entitlement to relief u/s 80HH for producing an article. 3. Granting relief u/s 80HH for processing raw fish in another concern. Issue 1 - Deduction of purchase tax: The Income-tax Officer disallowed the deduction of purchase tax paid for prawns produced and exported by the assessee, but both appellate authorities allowed it as an expenditure under section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court upheld this decision, stating that the deduction was allowable under section 37. Issue 2 - Entitlement to relief u/s 80HH: The Income-tax Officer initially disallowed the claim for deduction under section 80HH, arguing that the business did not involve manufacture or production. However, this decision was overturned by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and confirmed by the Tribunal. The court analyzed the legislative intent behind section 80HH, emphasizing the encouragement of new industries in backward areas. It concluded that the prawns processed by the assessee qualified as articles produced or manufactured, thus entitling them to the benefit of section 80HH. Issue 3 - Relief u/s 80HH for processing raw fish: The Revenue contended that processing prawns did not constitute manufacture or production, as required by section 80HH. The assessee argued that processed or frozen prawns should be considered as manufactured or produced commodities. The court examined the process of preparing prawns for export, including beheading and deveining, and determined that these activities involved production or manufacture. It upheld the findings of the lower authorities, stating that the process qualified for the benefits of section 80HH. The judgment favored the assessee on all three issues, allowing the deduction of purchase tax and granting relief under section 80HH. The court directed the parties to bear their respective costs in the tax referred case.
|
