9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (10) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f 1979 is in respect of the assessment year 1969-70. M/s. Jai Drinks (P.) Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred to as "the assessee"), used to manufacture and sell soft drinks, coca cola, etc. The products of the assessee were supplied in marked bottles. The assessee made a claim in respect of bottles and shells on actual breakage and deficiencies between the cost price and the rates fixed for charging refundable security deposits from the dealers in order to ensure the return of bottles and shells by valuing the bottles and shells at the end of the year at such deposit rates and adjusting the deficiency or excess to the profit and loss account. In the first assessment, the ITO allowed the claim of actual breakage but rejected the claim regard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal, the Commissioner, Rajasthan, filed an application under s. 256(1) of the Act requiring the Tribunal to refer certain questions of law arising out of the consolidated order dated February 7, 1977, passed by the Tribunal in Income-tax Appeals Nos. 26, 270 and 526 in respect of the assessment years under consideration. The Tribunal, however, declined to state the case. Consequently, the Commissioner has made this application under s. 256(2) of the Act before this court and has prayed that the Tribunal may be directed to refer the following question of law arising out of its order dated February 7, 1977, for the opinion of this court : " Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ve is only illustrative and not exhaustive and, therefore, it has to be decided in the facts and circumstances of each case whether a particular article comes within the definition of the term "plant". Shri Ranka has cited before us a number of authorities to illustrate as to what is a "plant", but we are unable to accept his contention that the answer to be furnished in the present case is self-evident. It is, no doubt, true that if no substantial question of law is involved and if the answer to a certain question is self-evident, then it will be a futile exercise to call for a reference. If an authority is needed on the point, reference may be made to CIT v. Chander Bhan Harbhajan Lal [1966] 60 ITR 188, wherein the Supreme Court was pleas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
