Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. It has been candidly stated by both learned counsel that so far as question No. 3 is concerned, relating to allowing the relief under Section 80J of the Income-tax Act, the question is squarely covered by a decision of this court in C1T v. ]. B. Kharwar and Sons [1987] 163 ITR 394, wherein the court held that when the assessee subjected grey cloth to the process of dyeing and printing, it produced a distinct article having distinct use as distinguished from the grey cloth, though grey cloth still subsisted. As a result of the process to which grey cloth was subjected there was transformation of grey cloth into a new commodity commercially known as a distinct and separate commodity having its own character, use and name. Transformation of grey cloth to the extent that it became a commercially different commodity was sufficient to hold that there was manufacture or production of an Article within the meaning of clause (iii) of Sub-section (4) of Section 80J of the Act. On the aforesaid finding, the assessee was held entitled to the relief under Section 80J of the Act. The decision is founded on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Empire Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [1986] 162 ITR 846 ; [1987] 64 STC 42, under the Central Excises and Salt Act. We are in respectful agreement. Accordingly, question No. 3 referred to above is answered in the affirmative, in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.