1976 (12) TMI 98

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ally did crushing work for two other concerns; M/s M.M. Nagalinga Nadar and M/s Nagalinga Vilas Ginning and Decorticating Works. The assessee was a partner having 106th share in the first concern. The assessee was not a partner in the second concern but it leased out the machinery to that firm. The assessee claimed exemption under s. 5(1)(xxxi) and (xxxii) respectively in respect of the industrial....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....unsel for the assessee has pointed out that the conclusions arrived at by the Commissioner were not correct in so far as all the conditions required under s. 5 (1)(xxxi) and (xxxii) are satisfied in the present case. The machinery was applied for industrial purposes in an industrial under-taking and processing of goods were carried on both in the individual business as well as in the partnership. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....though the concern belonged to the assessee. As regards the firm in which the assessee was a partner, it is pointed out that the machinery did not belong to the firm, even if the firm's activity be regarded as an industrial undertaking in so far as the firm did not own the machinery. Relief under s. 5(1) (xxxi) was not available. 4. We have considered the facts. The assessee has claimed exempti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he manufactures oil, cannot be denied. The mere fact that after processing the raw materials, the finished products are handed over by the same constituents who gave the raw materials instead of selling them to outsiders, does not make the business of the assessee any the less an industrial undertaking. The learned Dept. counsel brought to out notice the decision in ITA No 577 & 578 (MDS) 74-75 or....