Supreme Court of India
Indian Poultry vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 22 February, 2001
Equivalent citations: AIR2001SC1555, [2001]250ITR664(SC), (2001)9SCC740, AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 1555, 2001 (9) SCC 740, 2001 AIR SCW 1235, 2001 TAX. L. R. 666, 2001 (4) SUPREME 353, (2001) 116 TAXMAN 493, (2001) 4 SUPREME 353.2, (2001) 250 ITR 664, (2001) 162 TAXATION 3
Bench: S.P. Bharucha, N. Santosh Hegde
ORDER
1. The three questions which the High Court (see [1998] 230 ITR 909) answered against the assessee read thus (page 910) :
"(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee, being not an industrial undertaking, it is not entitled to deduction under Section 80I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?
(ii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction under Sections 80HH and 80I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as an industrial undertaking ?
(iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in not following the decision of 'the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. Sri Venkateswara Hatcheries P. Ltd. [1988] 174 ITR 231 which was favourable to the assessee, particularly when there was no decision of jurisdictional High Court on the point at issue ?"
2. It is not in dispute that the case is covered against the assessee by the judgment of this court in CIT v. Venkateswara Hatcheries P. Ltd. [1999] 237 ITR 174. The further point that was made by the assessee was that it not only reared the chicken but also dressed them for sale in the market and, therefore, a process of manufacture was carried out. But, it appears that there was no material laid before the Tribunal in this behalf. It is, therefore, not possible to conclude in the present matter that the dressing of poultry is tantamount to manufacture.
3. The appeal is dismissed.
4. No order as to costs.