1985 (9) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y for manufacturing textile machinery parts. For setting up this factory it purchased new plant and machinery and installed the same in a portion of a building in the Laxmi Woollen Mill's estate which it took on lease and which had been previously used by an earlier occupant for the purposes of business. The assessee also took on lease a portion of the Bank of Baroda Building in the same estate for its office, and these premises had also been previously used by the earlier occupant thereof for purposes of business. The assessee claimed the benefit of partial exemption from income-tax provided under the provisions of section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (as it stood at the relevant time). In respect of the assessment years 1963-64, 1964-65....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....by the same assessee as the one before us under section 15C of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, in respect of the assessment year 1961-62. The Division Bench took the view that for the purposes of section 15C (2) (i) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, it is not necessary that the building transferred to the newly started undertaking must have been previously used by the assessee himself in any other business and that a building earlier used for business by a stranger is included in the mischief contemplated in the said clause. It was further held that the lease taken by the assessee of a portion of the building and a portion of the estate for setting up its factory amounted to "transfer to new business of building ... previously used in an....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e was so insignificant that it was not even shown in the balance-sheet and hence, the assessee could not be denied the benefit of the relief conferred under section 15C(1) of the Indian Incometax Act, 1922. It was submitted by Mr. Jetly, learned counsel for the Revenue, that, notwithstanding this, we should answer the question referred to us against the assessee and leave the Tribunal to investigate the facts separately, because the relevant assessment years in the present reference are different from the relevant assessment years in the case decided by the Division Bench of this court referred to earlier. We see no reason to adopt this course. The fact that the assessment years are different would not make any difference, because what the ....