Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd. V. Dy. C.I.T. (Asstt.)

TAXAP/244/2002

AI Insights

The case involves Standard Tea Processing Co. Ltd., the appellant, challenging the judgment and order dated 8.1.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C' in ITA No. 4332/Ahd/1995 for the assessment year 1992-93. The core issue was whether the process of blending tea produces an article or thing within the meaning of Section 80I of the Income Tax Act, 1961, thereby creating a different commercial commodity. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's decision was partly in favor of the assessee, which led to the current appeal. The High Court of Gujarat, after hearing the arguments and considering the precedent set by the Apex Court, dismissed the appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 819930 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 21-11-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Tara Agencies
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: MAUNA BHATT
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH SHAH
• Keywords: Appeal; Assessment Order; Income Tax; Tea Blending; Commercial Commodity
• Section: 142(1); 143(2); 143(1)(a); 80I

Judgement Text

"O/TAXAP/244/2002 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 244 of 2002 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ STANDARD TEA PROCESSING CO.LTD....Appellant(s) Versus DY.C.I.T. (ASSTT.)....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR MANISH J SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MRS MAUNA M BHATT, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Page 1 of 3 O/TAXAP/244/2002 JUDGMENT Date : 21/11/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 8.1.2002 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench “C” in ITA No. 4332/Ahd/1995 for AY 1992-93. 2. While admitting this appeal on 12.8.2002, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law: “Whether the process of blending tea can be said to produce an article or thing within the meaning of Section 80I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 so as to bring into existence an article or thing which is different commercial commodity ?” 3. The facts of the present case are that the return of income showing total income of Rs. 64,66,310/- was filed by the assessee company on 30.12.1992. The return was processed under sec. 143(1)(a) on 22.3.1993. The return was accompanied with audited statements of accounts and tax audit report. The notice under sec. 142(1) and 143(2) were issued to the assessee along with questionnaire. The assessee has filed the details and other requirement. After Page 2 of 3 O/TAXAP/244/2002 JUDGMENT considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. Against the said assessment order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) which came to be partly allowed. Against the said order, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the ITAT which was also partly allowed. Against the said order of the ITAT, the present Tax Appeal by the assessee before this Court. 4. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considered the submissions. Mr. Bhatt learned advocate appearing for the respondent has pointed out that the issue is governed by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Tara Agencies, reported in 292 ITR 444, which was not disputed by the learned advocate for the appellant. In view of the said decision of the Apex Court, without giving any elaborate reasons, the question is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The present Tax Appeal is dismissed. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J) mandora Page 3 of 3 "