Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Section 80I in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
C.I.T vs N.C.Budharaja And Co on 7 September, 1993
10. With the abovementioned principles laid down in the recent judgments of the Honble Supreme Court and the Honble Bombay High Court referred to above it becomes obvious that the ratio of decision of the Honble Bombay High Court in the Sales Tax case of Indian Metal Traders (supra) which is dated 29-11-1977, may no longer apply to the provisions of sections 80-HHA and 80-I. We have to consider the meaning of manufacture and production of articles or things in their ordinary plain and natural meaning. When we do this we find ourselves in agreement with the view taken by Assessing Officer because breaking or dismantling a ship would perhaps be just the opposite of manufacturing or production of an article or a thing. When a ship is dismantled or broken what is obtained by the person or persons who are engaged in this process are those components by which the ship was constructed or manufactured and if it is possible to reassemble those pieces or parts, the ship may be manufactured or constructed. Hence in our view it would be doing violence to the language if we say that while we are dismantling or breaking or destroying a ship we are in effect manufacturing or producing an article or a thing.
Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Bombay ... vs Pressure Pilling Co. (India) P. Ltd. on 10 January, 1979
In the decision reported in N. C. Budharaja & Co. (supra) their Lordships have specifically reversed the decision of the Honble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Pressure Piling Co. (India) (P.)
Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Sterling Foods (Goa) on 23 November, 1994
In these circumstances applying the law laid down by the Honble Supreme Court in the case of N. C. Budharaja & Co. (supra) and by the Honble Bombay High Court in the case of Sterling Foods (Goa) (supra) we come to only one conclusion and that is that the activity of breaking or dismantling a ship or ships cannot be considered to be an industrial undertaking which manufactures or produces articles or things and hence we hold that it is not entitled to the deductions mentioned in sections 80-HHA and 80-I of the I.T. Act.
Polestar Electronic(P) Ltd vs Addl. Commissioner, Sales Tax Delhi on 20 February, 1978
"This principle of interpretation is too well-known to need any elaboration. As observed by the Supreme Court in Polestar Electronic (P.) Ltd. v. Addl. CST [1978] 41 STC 409, if there is one principle of interpretation more well-settled than any other, it is that a statutory enactment must ordinarily be construed according to the plain natural meaning of its language and that no words should be added, altered or modified unless it is plainly necessary to do so in order to prevent a provision from being unintelligible, absurd, unreasonable, unworkable, or totally irreconcilable with the rest of the statute".
1