https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8473 For section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the expression "used" was not confined to continuous actual working throughout the previous year, and the existing Supreme Court position supported treating the asset as used where the factual circumstances showed such use; the issue was answered for the assessee. A seasonal sugar factory could not, however, be treated as used merely because it was capable of seasonal operation when there was no finding of preliminary arrangements or actual crushing during the year; on those facts, the issue was again answered for the assessee and against the department. The surplus on sale of the factory was therefore not brought to tax on the Revenue's basis. en-us Tue, 17 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 26 Apr 2009 22:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8473 For section 10(2)(vii) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the expression "used" was not confined to continuous actual working throughout the previous year, and the existing Supreme Court position supported treating the asset as used where the factual circumstances showed such use; the issue was answered for the assessee. A seasonal sugar factory could not, however, be treated as used merely because it was capable of seasonal operation when there was no finding of preliminary arrangements or actual crushing during the year; on those facts, the issue was again answered for the assessee and against the department. The surplus on sale of the factory was therefore not brought to tax on the Revenue's basis. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Nov 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8473