Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Welcome to TaxTMI

We're migrating from taxmanagementindia.com to taxtmi.com and wish to make this transition convenient for you. We welcome your feedback and suggestions. Please report any errors you encounter so we can address them promptly.

Bars
Logo TaxTMI
>
×

By creating an account you can:

Feedback/Report an Error
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home /

2004 (11) TMI 14

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of machinery used in mining activity ignoring the fact that the assessee is engaged in extraction and processing of iron ore, not amounting to manufacture or production of any article or thing?" The High Court, while dismissing the appeal preferred by the Revenue, held that extraction and processing of iron ore did not amount to "manufacture". However, it came to the conclusion that extraction of iron ore and the various processes would involve "production" within the meaning of section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act"), entitling the assessee to investment allowance under the said provision. According to the Revenue, which is in appeal before us, the H....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....edule to the Act. There is no dispute that the plant in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction was owned by it and was installed after March 31, 1976, in the assessee's industrial undertaking for excavating, mining and processing mineral ore. Mineral ore is not excluded by the Eleventh Schedule. The only question is whether such business is one of manufacture or production of ore. The issue had arisen before different High Courts over a period of time. The High Courts have held that the activity amounted to "production" and answered the issue in question in favour of the assessee. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh did so in CIT v. Singareni Collieries Co. Ltd. [1996] 221 ITR 48, the Calcutta High Court in Khalsa Brothers v. CIT [199....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....production' or 'produce' when used in juxtaposition with the word 'manufacture' takes in bringing into existence new goods by a process which may or may not amount to manufacture. It also takes in all the by-products, intermediate products and residual products which emerge in the course of manufacture of goods." It is, therefore, not necessary, as has been sought to be contended by learned counsel for the Revenue, that the mined ore must be a commercially new product. The decisions and other authorities on the definition of the word "ore", as cited by the appellant, are irrelevant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, correctly submitted that the other provisions of the Act, particularly section 33(1)(b)(B) read with Item....