Worker requirement under section 80J(4)(iv) treated as substantially complied with despite a brief shortfall.

Section 80J(4)(iv) was applied on the basis that the assessee substantially met the worker requirement, as it employed more than ten workers in most months and the exclusion of secretarial, accounting and peon staff left a shortfall of only one worker for one month. That marginal and temporary deficiency was treated as insufficient to defeat relief, so the deduction was allowed. The meaning of "worker" was taken from the Factories Act, 1948 because the Income-tax Act did not define it differently, and that definition governed the section 80J(4)(iv) test.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee satisfied the worker requirement under section 80J(4)(iv) so as to qualify for relief, and whether a temporary shortfall of one worker in one month defeated the claim.

Analysis: The assessee had more than ten workers in most months of the relevant year, and the exclusion of secretary, accountants and peons left only nine workers in one month. The provision was treated as substantially complied with because the shortage was marginal and occurred only for a limited period. The meaning of "worker" was taken from the Factories Act, 1948 since the Income-tax Act did not define it differently, and that meaning was applied for section 80J(4)(iv).

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to relief under section 80J(4)(iv); the temporary shortage did not disentitle it from the deduction.

---