9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (5) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dertakings in terms of s. 80J. However, this claim of the assessee was negatived by the ITO and his decision was upheld by the CIT (Appeals) on the ground that the assessee did not fulfil the conditions laid down u/s 80J(4) (iv) of the Act. Hence the grievance of the assessee. 3. The assessee as stated is manufacturing cycle frames. This manufacturing process is carried on without the aid of power. The assessment year under appeal is the first assessment year. During the early period of the accounting year, the assessee employed less than 20 workers but subsequently in the month of April 1974 upto the end of the accounting period, the number of workers employed was 20 or more. The claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80J was disallowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Rowlatt, J. in Cape Brandy Syndicate vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners (1921) 1 KB 64 at 71 thus: "In a taxing Act one has to look merely at what is clearly said. There is no room for any intendment. There is no equity about a tax. There is no presumption as to a tax. Nothing is to be read in, nothing is to be implied. One can only look fairly at the language used" The Hon'ble Court has further observed that, "equally important is the rule of construction that if the words of a statute are precise and unambiguous they must be accepted as declaring express intentions of the legislature". 5. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs. Simpson Co. (1980) 122 ITR 283 (Mad) has held that it is a well settled principle of construct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elopment rebate at the rate of 25%. The relevant facts for determination of this issue are that the assessee set up the new undertaking for the manufacture of cycle frames. According to the assessee, it should have been allowed development rebate at 25% in view of the provision of s. 33(1)(b) (B) (i) of the IT Act, 1961 read with the Fifth Schedule to the Act. The claim of the assessee is that it is covered under item 20 of this Schedule which is as under: "(20) Automobile ancillaries." After hearing the assessee and the revenue it is held that the claim, of the assessee is untenable because of the following reasons: 'Automobile' has been defined by the Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary as a Motor-car. While interpreting s. 377(1) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
