1986 (3) TMI 12

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lf was done by others for cooly, within the meaning of the Explanation to section 5(1)(xxxi) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ". It is necessary to point out that when the Tribunal was directed to refer the above question, this court also required the Tribunal to point out the extent of the work done by the assessee and work which it had got done by other agencies so as to enable the question be decided. When the Tribunal submitted the statement of the case, the Tribunal pointed out that the assessee was a partner in two firms, namely, M/s. Onni Chettiar and Sons and M/s. Ajantha Bleaching and Dyeing Works and that Messrs. Onni Chettiar and sons only purchased grey yarn and got it bleached for cooly by M/s. Ajantha Bleaching & Dyeing Works. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as been referred to this court. Section 5 of the Act deals with exemption in respect of certain assets and in sub-section (1) thereof, " assets " which are not to be included in the net wealth of the assessee and in respect of which no wealth-tax is payable by the assessee have been enumerated. Clauses (xxxi) and (xxxii) of sub-section (1) of section 5 of the Act read as follows : " (xxxi) the value, as determined in the prescribed manner, of assets (not being any land or building or any rights in any land or building or any asset referred to in any other clause of this sub-section) forming part of an industrial undertaking belonging to the assessee. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause and clause (xxxii), the term 'industr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... purchased by it bleached by the said firm, Messrs. Ajantha Bleaching and Dyeing Works. The question as to whether the share of the assessee in both the partnership firms is exempted or whether the share in Messrs. Ajantha Bleaching and Dying Works will alone be exempted appears to stand concluded by the decision of this court in CWT v. K. Lakshmi [1983] 142 ITR 656. In that decision, this court has taken the view that in cases where the assessee gets the goods manufactured by an outside agency, he cannot be said to manufacture the goods, merely because the assessee pays for the manufacture or feeds the expenses incurred in the manufacture and in respect of " processing ", it will not be correct to state that all the processes resulting in ....