| Case ID |
25ffa3a0-4c54-46ff-949e-64f9991523dc |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
TAX CASE Nos. 172 AND 173 OF 1975 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The case involved the determination of whether the assessee, engaged in the business of machining and polishing rough castings, was entitled to a higher development rebate under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The initial claim for a 35% rebate was denied by the Income Tax Officer, who asserted that the case did not qualify under the specified provisions of the Act. However, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner overruled this decision, stating that the assessee's activities fell under the relevant items of the Fifth Schedule. The Tribunal confirmed this ruling, emphasizing that the term 'manufacture' should be interpreted broadly. Ultimately, the court ruled in favor of the assessee, validating the entitlement to a higher development rebate, which was confirmed as 35%. No costs were awarded as the assessee was unrepresented. |
| Summary |
This case highlights the interpretation of 'manufacture' within the context of the Income-tax Act, 1961, particularly regarding development rebates. The assessee, a business involved in the processing of rough castings into components for internal combustion engines, claimed a higher rate of rebate based on its classification as a priority industry. The Income Tax Officer initially denied this claim, asserting that mere polishing did not constitute manufacture. However, subsequent appeals led to a determination that the transformation of raw materials into a new product indeed qualified as manufacturing. The court's ruling reinforces the importance of recognizing the economic activities that contribute to the production of essential components in various industries, affirming the right to a higher development rebate under the law. |
| Court |
Madras High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Sethuraman, J.,
Balasubrahmanyan, JJ.
|
| Lawyers |
J. Jayaraman,
Mrs. Nalini Chidambaram
|
| Petitioners |
Not available
|
| Respondents |
Commissioner of Income Tax,
Perfect Liners
|
| Citations |
1983 SLD 964,
(1983) 142 ITR 654
|
| Other Citations |
CIT v. M.R. Gopal [1965] 58 ITR 598 (Mad.)
|
| Laws Involved |
Income-tax Act, 1961
|
| Sections |
33
|