9911796707
TMI Blog1984 (12) TMI 122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asst. yr. 1979-80. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the assessee employed 10 or more workers in the manufacturing process and it fulfilled all the conditions under s. 80J(4)(iv). In the original return, the assessee claimed only Rs. 9,710 as 80J relief computing its capital only at Rs. 12,94,770 and computing the relief at 7 1/2 per cent of the said amount. However, in the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stion as follows: Month and Year No. of employees February, 1978 12 (inclusive of 1 Secy., 1 Store Keeper, 1 Manager, 3 Watchmen) March, 1978 13 (inclusive of 1 Secy., 1 Manager, 1 Asstt. Accountant, 2 Watchmen, 1 peon) April, 1978 12 (inclusive of 1 Secy., 1 Manager, 1 Office boy and 1 Acctt. Asstt.) May, 1978 14(inclusive of 1 Secy., 1 Manager, 1 Acctt. Asstt., and 1 peon) June, 1978 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved in this appeal revolves round the fact as to who can be said to be a worker engaged in the managing process At p. 3 of the paper compilation, excluding secretary, accountants and peon, the number of workers engaged in the manufacturing process beginning from February, 1978 to December, 1978 were given as follows: Month & Yr. No. of Workers 2/78 11 3/78 10 4/78 9 5/78 10 6/78 10 7/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In ITA No. 731/JP/82, this Tribunal already considered the question whether an industrial undertaking should lose 80J relief merely because in one month there is shortage of workers engaged in the manufacturing process or to put it more clearly, whether instead if 10 workers if nine workers were only engaged. This Tribunal by order dt. 13th May, 1983 held in para 4 of its order as follows: The n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned in the IT Act and hence the dictionary meaning of the worker should be adopted instead of the meaning attached to the word 'worker' under the Factories Act, 1948. We feel it very difficult to appreciate this argument when a word is defined in another legislation unless the word is differently defined in the impugned Act, it should carry the meaning given to it in the Act in which it is defined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
