9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (8) TMI 127X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew that the assessments were erroneous in so far as they were prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 3. A show cause notice for both the assessment years was issued to the assessee. In response to the show cause notice written explanation was filed before the CIT on behalf of the assessee. The assessee relied on the Circular No. 10/83/69-AII/AII dt. 28th Sept., 1970 issued by the CBDT on extra shift allowance on plant and machinery. It was submitted that in view of that circular extra shift allowance has to be allowed in respect of the entire plant and machinery used by the concern without making any attempt to determine the number of days on which each machine actually worked double or triple shift during the relevant year. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contention reliance has been placed on several decisions of various Benches of the Tribunal reported in (1984) 9 ITD 469, First ITO vs. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. (1985) 22 TTJ (Bom) 300 : (1985) 13 ITD 331, Indian Aluminium Cables Ltd. vs. IAC (1985) 23 TTJ (Del) 458 : (1985) 13 ITD 907 (Del) and IAC vs. Lakshmi Machine Works Ltd. (1988) 24 ITD 511 (Mad). Shri Syali was fair enough to refer to the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Anantpur Textiles Ltd. vs. CIT (1979) 116 ITR 851 (Cal), wherein it has been held that extra shift allowance on machinery should be calculated with reference to the actual number of days each item of machinery had been put to use and not on the number of days the concern worked in the previous yea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subsequent assessment year. 7. Shri V. Sahani, learned Departmental Representative, has on the other hand, fully supported the impugned orders of the CIT. It was submitted that the AO did not make any enquiry on the question whether the plant and machinery on which extra shift allowance was claimed at all worked during the relevant accounting year and that as this has not done, the CIT was justified in holding that the assessment orders were erroneous in so far as they were prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 8. We have considered the rival submissions as also the facts on record. As has been stated on behalf of the assessee the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Anantpur Textiles Ltd. is against assessee. Howe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... phold the assessee's contention that extra shift allowance in this case has to be allowed in respect of the entire plant and machinery used by the concern without making any attempt to determine the number of days on which each machine actually worked double or triple shift during the relevant previous year. 9. At page 20 of the paper book filed for the asst. yr. 1981-82, there appears a copy of the certificate issued by the Personnel Manager certifying that the factory worked for three shifts during the year 1979-80 for 358 days. Page No. 21 is a copy of the letter dt. 16th Dec., 1983 sent on behalf of the assessee to the ITO giving certain details including the details of certificate of triple shift as asked for by the ITO. Page 22 giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
