TMI Blog1991 (8) TMI 69X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eciation for such shift and computed the assessee's total taxable income at Rs. 63,562. The Commissioner of Income-tax invoked his revisional powers under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short), and, after hearing the assessee, who appeared before him in response to the show-cause notice, held that White Phosphoric Acid Plant was a new manufacturing unit set up in the calendar year 1971. He further found that the said new unit had worked only for 53 days and the assessee was entitled to extra shift allowance at 53/240 of half the normal depreciation. He, therefore, held that the Income-tax Officer had erred in allowing extra shift allowance. The Commissioner, therefore, set aside the assessment and directed the Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interfering with the order of the Income-tax Officer. In the view which it took, the Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal. The Tribunal has, at the instance of the Revenue, referred to us for our opinion the following questions under section 256(1) of the Act: "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to initiate action under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and to pass order directing the Income-tax Officer to revise the assessment ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the concern as a whole consisted of two plants which inclu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is concerned, there is no dispute that it had worked double shift for the whole year. In view of the decision of the Board referred to above, the assessee would be entitled to double shift allowance in respect of the new plant. It must, therefore, be held that the Tribunal was right in setting aside the order of the Commissioner on merits and restoring the order of the Income-tax Officer. In view of the decision of the Board, it must be held that the assessee is entitled to extra shift allowance as claimed by it and allowed by the Income-tax Officer. Question No. (2) must, therefore, be answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue. In the view which we are taking, it is not necessary to answer questions Nos. (1) and (3). So far as q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
