Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 40 (1.00 seconds)
Documents citing Ship Scrap Traders, Ispat Traders And ... vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 4 May, 2001

The Asstt. C.I.T. vs National Lamination Industries And ... on 5 June, 2007

In Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation (supra) Gujrat High Court held that ship breaking activity was not an activity of manufacture or production of any article or thing for the purposes of availing of the benefit of deductions under Sections 80HH and 80-I. This decision is contrary to the jurisdictional High court of Bombay in Ship Scrap Traders (supra) and therefore may not be any help to the revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 106 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Mercator Lines Ltd. vs Deputy Cit, Range 5(1) on 25 June, 2007

Again in the case of Ship Scrap Traders v. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 8062 (Bom.), the issue in dispute was whether ship breaking amounts to manufacture or production of things or articles within the meaning of Sections 80HH and 80-I. Again the definition of industrial undertaking was not in dispute. Whatever judgments are referred to by the assessee, they are not at all relevant to the present controversy. To understand the real meaning of Industrial Undertaking one should go either to the plain or general meaning or the meaning adopted in various provisions of the Act. As per plain and general meaning, industrial undertaking should be an undertaking engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods. The similar definition is also in Explanation 1 to Section 33B, according to which industrial undertaking means any undertaking which is mainly engaged in the business of generation of or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the construction of ships or in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the arguments of the assessee.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 35 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Cit vs Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation & Ors. on 20 March, 2003

Even in Ship Scraps Traders case (supra), an old ship was bought for the purpose of demolition and the ship was dismantled. The Bombay High Court, however, distinguished its earlier judgment on the ground that the ship was in that case condemned and unserviceable. The Tribunal relied upon the above judgment of the Bombay High Court, observing that since the ships were new and in good working condition because they remained afloat, it followed the said decision.
Gujarat High Court Cites 135 - Cited by 8 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Vijay Ship Breaking Corporation on 20 March, 2003

Even in Ship Scrap Traders's case [2001] 251 ITR 806 (Bom), an old ship was bought for the purpose of demolition and the ship was dismantled. The Bombay High Court, however, distinguished its earlier judgment on the ground that the ship was in that case condemned and unserviceable. The Tribunal relied upon the above judgment of the Bombay High Court, observing that since the ships were new and in good working condition because they remained afloat, it followed the said decision.
Gujarat High Court Cites 132 - Cited by 33 - A L Dave - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Vijay Ship Breaking Corpn. And Ors. on 20 March, 2003

Even in Ship Scraps Traders case (supra), an old ship was bought for the purpose of demolition and the ship was dismantled. The Bombay High Court, however, distinguished its earlier judgment on the ground that the ship was in that case condemned and unserviceable. The Tribunal relied upon the above judgment of the Bombay High Court, observing that since the ships were new and in good working condition because they remained afloat, it followed the said decision.
Gujarat High Court Cites 133 - Cited by 0 - A L Dave - Full Document

D.P. Agrawal vs Cit on 13 May, 2004

25. Learned counsel for appellant has further relied upon a decision of Bombay High Court in Ship Scrap Traders v. CIT (2001) 251 ITR 806 (Bom) wherein Division Bench has considered the question of deduction under section 80HHA and section 80I of the Act, the meaning of 1ndustrial undertaking", "manufacture" and "produce". It has been held that ship breaking needs expertise and results in production of articles, same amounts to manufacture. Assessee engaged in ship breaking is entitled to special deduction under sections 80HHA and 80I of the Act. The ratio of the case has different field to operate as in the instant case dismantling of the Guns is not an activity of assessee. Only incidentally the Guns were purchased in the relevant year for the purpose of rerolling as per explanation (A/1) of assessee. In our opinion, there is no direct nexus in the activity of separation of brass scrap from the Guns which were purchased for utilization in rerolling of steel scrap. In the activity of ship breaking, several articles were obtained; viz., ferrous metal, non-ferrous metals which includes brass. The meaning of the word "manufacture" has been considered which implies a change but every change is not manufacture. There must be a transformation of kind and anew different item should have been emerged having different features. Word "manufacture" does not mean merely some change in the substance, but the expression "manufacture" has in ordinary acceptation a wide connotation : it means making of articles or material commercially different from the basic components, by physical labour or mechanical process. The word "production" has a wider connotation than "manufacture". Scrap iron and steel which were obtained by the assessee by dismantling and breaking up of the ship must be regarded as a different commercial commodity from the ship itself, and hence the activity would amount to manufacture. The goods manufactured would be scrap iron and steel obtained or manufactured by the dismantling and making up of the ship, and the goods used in the manufacture of this scrap iron and steel would be the ship itself. Thereafter commercial commodities were obtained as such it was held to be a process of manufacture. In the instant case, guns may have several components, sometime brass or some other articles which may not be connected at all with the manufacturing process of an industrial undertaking of steel rerolling. There was nexus in the above case of scrap to the process of dismantling of the ship which was the main activity of assessee which nexus is not available in the instant case. Hence, decision renders no support to the submission advanced.
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - A Mishra - Full Document

M/S. Vakkal Impex Pvt. Ltd,, Bangalore vs Department Of Income Tax on 5 September, 2012

"11.0..........................................................I find much force in the contention of the appellant that the activity carried out by the appellant amounts to 'manufacturing' activity. After considering the submissions and the explanation given by the appellant as regard to the activity carried out by the appellant in the process of exporting the recycled scrap which are reproduced in the preceding paragraphs, I hold that the activity carried out by the appellant amounts to manufacturing. Further, in support of the case, the appellant has relied on certain judicial pronouncements which I have perused and in my considered opinion, the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of India Cine Agencies vs. CIT 308 ITR 98 (SC) and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Ship Scrap Traders, Ispat Brothers, Bansal Brothers v. CIT 251 ITR 806 (Bom) are akin to the facts of the present case. Hence, I am of the opinion that the importing of scrap form (sic) from other countries and the process involved by the appellant to recycle ferrous and non-ferrous scrap amounts to manufacturing activity and is well in the definition of 'manufacture' as per section 2 (29BA) of the Income- tax Act, 1961 and, hence, the appellant is eligible to claim exemption under section 10B of the Act........."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 30 October, 2009

14. Mr. Vohra also referred to the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Ship Scrap Traders v. Commissioner of Income Tax, 251 ITR 806. This case concerns with the deductions under Section 80HHA and 80IA of the Act, which are available to an „industrial undertaking‟ engaged in manufacture or production of an article or a thing. While holding that the assessee would be entitled to deduction under the aforesaid provision as it was engaged in the activity of ship breaking and was, thus, an „industrial undertaking‟, the Court observed as under :-
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 3 - A K Sikri - Full Document

Jitsan Enterprises, Nani Daman vs Department Of Income Tax on 5 June, 2009

(2) In [2001] 251 ITR 0806- Ship Scrap Traders vs. Commissioner of Income-tax Bombay High Court has observed that for assessees engaged in ship breaking the scrap and, steel obtained by dismantling and breaking up of the ship must be regarded as a different commercial commodity from the ship itself, and the activity would amount to manufacture.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Ahmedabad Cites 21 - Cited by 3 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next