TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (3) TMI 576
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....one (2003) 10 SCC 771 the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80HH and 80I of the Income tax Act ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, does conversion of granite boulders into small pieces of different size amount to production or manufacture ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and if the answer to the above question is in the affirmative does the assessee in view of sub section(9) of Section 80HH is entitled to deduction both under Sections 80HH and 80I ?" 2. The above appeals pertain to different assessment years of the respondent/assessee. The facts that lead to the filing of these appeals in brief are as under: Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....assessee. Aggrieved by the said order of the First Appellate Authority, the Revenue went before the Tribunal challenging the order of the CIT(Appeals). The Tribunal following the law laid down in the case of Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax v. Poabson Granite Products (P) Ltd. in ITA No.495/Coch/2004 dated 04.08.2005 and Panchayil Industries (ITA Nos. 336, 337 & 338/Coch/2002), confirmed the opinion of CIT(Appeals) rejecting the claim of the Revenue. Aggrieved by the same, the Revenue is before this Court contending that the activity carried on in the crushing units of the respondent/assessee can neither be called as manufacturing activity or the outcome of the process can be termed as production. 4. Learned Standing Counsel representing the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ps after referring to several judgments of different High Courts and also earlier judgments of the Apex Court dismissed the appeal. The cases which are relevant for the purpose of considering the case on hand would be CIT v. N.C. Budharaja and Co. [(1993) 204 ITR 412 (SC)] and CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd. [(2004) 271 ITR 331 (SC)] which reads as under: "In the case of CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd. reported in [2004] 271 ITR 331 (SC), the meaning of the word "production" came up for consideration. The question which came before this court was whether the Income-tax Appellate tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of machinery used in mining activity ignoring the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... As a matter of fact, Lucky Minmat Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and Arihant Tiles (supra), both are by Benches consisting of three judges of the Apex Court. In Arihant Tiles (supra) case they referred to the principle laid down in Lucky Minmat Pvt. Ltd. (supra). In Lucky Minmat Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the issue that came up for consideration was whether mining of limestone and marble blocks, and cutting and sizing them, amounts to manufacture or production of article in order to consider deduction under Section 80HH of the Act. The Apex Court held that the assessee had business of mining of limestone and marble blocks and thereafter cutting and sizing before being sold in the market amounts to conversion into lime and lime dust or concrete by stone crushe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., has to be seen from the test whether the commodity which is subjected to a process can no longer be demanded as original commodity but is a new and distinct commodity. They further opined that the word manufacture would ultimately mean there is existence of new goods by the process which may or may not involve manufacture. When the above is the settled position as of now one has to see the actual process that is undertaken so far as the respondent unit is concerned. The activity normally carried on by the respondent unit has the following process: "1. Digging holes using jackhammers and Air compressors and blasting for producing boulders. 2. Breaking of boulders using mechanical rock breakers to produce rubbles. 3. Loading the rubbles ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng undertaken which ultimately results in a different marketing product, in the units of the respondent/assessee, both processes are present, i.e. manufacture and also production. In the light of the above judgments and the reasoning, we are of the opinion, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the orders of CIT (Appeals). 10. So far as the benefits claimed under Sections 80HH, 80I and 80 IB as held by the Apex Court in the case of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mandideep Engineering and PKG. Industries P. Ltd. [(2007) 292 ITR 1 (SC)], if various deductions are independent in nature available to an assessee under different circumstances, they all have to be allowed if they come within the application of a particular provision of la....