2012 (7) TMI 609

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t on the ground that the respondent-assessee had not employed ten or more workers. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal have held to the contrary.   3. The learned counsel for the Revenue submits that the finding of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal that the respondent- assessee had employed 10 or more workers in the industrial undertaking at Jammu is factually incorrect and perverse. He relies upon the findings recorded by the Assessing Officer in paragraph 3.6 and 3.7 of the assessment order. For the sake of convenience the relevant portion of the aforesaid findings is reproduced below :   3.6 From the plain reading of the above section, it is clear that in a case where the indu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o involved in the manufacturing process. Though the word 'worker' has not been defined in the Income-tax Act, however, by taking the ordinary dictionary meaning it includes a casual, permanent or temporary worker. As is evidence that the assessee in its salary register has written 'c/labour' against the name of all workers meaning 'casual labour' for which the salary register has prepared and filed, therefore, the person other than the person appearing in the salary register cannot be taken into account for the purpose of counting the number of workers engaged in the manufacturing process. (emphasis supplied)   4. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) on the other hand has recorded that the respondent-assessee had employed 10 or ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....yed directly or by or through any agency (including a contractor) with or without the knowledge of the principal employer, whether for remuneration or not in any manufacturing process, or in any other kind or work incidental to or connected with the manufacturing process. Therefore, in the absence of the expression 'worker' defined under the Act, it would be reasonable to hold that the expression 'worker' in section 80-IB(2)(iv) of the Act is referable to the persons employed by the assessee directly or by or through any agency (including a contractor) in the manufacturing activity carried on by the assessee. In the present case, though the workers employed by the assessee directly were less than ten, it is not in dispute that the total num....