2012 (9) TMI 552 - SC - Income Tax

Profits derived from export of granite - denial to claim deduction as per sub-section 1-B of Section 80HHC - AY 1988-1989 - Held that - Answered against the assessee as decided in case of Gem Granites v. CIT 2004 (11) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT reading of the 1984 circular by holding that the circular expressly provided that polished and processed granite did not fall within the meaning of word minerals in 80HHC(2)(b) as it stood before 1991 - against assessee. Denial of Investment allowance on mining granite from quarries activities and exporting - cutting, polishing, etc. which does not tantamount to manufacture for the purpose of Section 32A - Held that - Answered in favour of assessee as decided in case of Gem Granites v. CIT 2004 (11) TMI 13 - SUPREME COURT

Summary

Issues involved:
1. Deduction of profits under Section 80HHC for export of goods (granite) for Assessment Year 1988-1989.
2. Entitlement to investment allowance for mining granite, cutting, polishing, and exporting activities under Section 32A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deduction under Section 80HHC for export of goods (granite):
The judgment addressed the question of whether the assessee is entitled to claim a deduction to the extent of profits derived from the export of goods, specifically granite, for the Assessment Year 1988-1989 under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. The Court referred to the judgment in Gem Granites v. CIT [2004] 141 Taxman 528, where it was held against the assessee. Consequently, the civil appeal filed by the assessee was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Issue 2: Entitlement to investment allowance for mining and exporting activities:
The second issue pertained to whether the assessee is entitled to investment allowance for activities involving mining granite from quarries, cutting, polishing, and exporting them, which were considered tantamount to manufacture for the purpose of Section 32A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Court noted that this issue was squarely covered in favor of the assessee by the judgment in Gem Granites v. CIT [2004] 141 Taxman 528. As a result, the civil appeals filed by the assessee were allowed with no order as to costs.

In conclusion, the judgment dealt with two distinct issues related to tax deductions and investment allowances for the export of granite and related activities. The decision in each case was based on the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act and previous judicial precedents, ultimately resulting in the dismissal of one civil appeal and the allowance of the other civil appeals.