Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1991 (2) TMI 63

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in treating the assessee as an 'industrial company' in respect of the assessment year under consideration and directing the Income-tax Officer to tax it accordingly ?" The relevant assessment year is 1973-74. Before the question as to whether the assessee-company is liable to be considered as an industrial company or not is considered, it is necessary to set out the material and relevant facts. Some of the relevant facts are as under: (a) The assessee manufactures pharmaceutical goods. The assessee started manufacturing the various pharmaceutical goods of its own with manufacturing plant and machinery owned by it at its own factory. The assessee continued to do so till .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssment year 1973-74, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal relied upon its judgment in the appeal of the same assessee pertaining to the earlier year. Learned counsel for the assessee has, therefore, filed a copy of the judgment of the Tribunal dated September 30, 1972, in respect of the appeals filed by the Department in the proceedings pertaining to earlier years. By consent, and we have taken the said copy of the judgment on record. In our judgment, the answer to this question is squarely covered by the judgment of our High Court in the case of CIT v.. Neo Pharma Private Ltd. [1982] 137 ITR 879. In this case, it was held that although the plant and machinery employed for the purpose of manufacture belonged to Pharmed and the services of ce .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rcise direct supervision over the manufacturing process of the kind suggested by learned counsel. It is sufficient if, on an overall view of the matter, it is found that it was the assessee-company which was the real manufacturer and the assessee had merely employed the agency of some one else through whom the goods were caused to be manufactured. It is also not necessary that the assessee must pay the wages of the workers employed in the manufacturing process. We have considered the factual data in this case in the light of the judgment of our High Court reported in Neo Pharma's case [1982] 137 ITR 879 referred to hereinabove and we are of the view that the Tribunal was right in the view which it took. In the result, we answer both the que .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates