COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAIL VS PATESINHJI GINNING, PRESSING AND MANUFACTURING CO. LTD

2000 P T D 3672

[238 I T R 148]

[Gujarat High Court (India)]

Before R. K. Abichandani and A.R. Dave, JJ

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX

Versus

FATESINHJI GINNING, PRESSING AND MANUFACTURING CO. LTD.

Income-tax Applications Nos. 120 to 124 of 1997, decided. on 22nd January, 1998.

Income-tax--

----Reference---Industrial company ---Concessional rate of tax---Cotton ginning and processing of cotton---Decision of High, Court that company which was ginning and processing cotton was an industrial company-- Question whether such a company was an industrial company could not be referred---Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, S.256.

Held, dismissing the application to direct reference that a similar question had arisen earlier in the case of the same assessee. The High Court in CIT v. Lakhtar Cotton Press Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (1983) 142 ITR 503 (Guj.) had held that where loose cotton in bulk quantity with lighter density was, as a result of pressing, converted into cotton bales and to that extent it underwent, a change, the assessee-company fell within the definition of an Industrial company because it processed cotton into cotton bales and was entitled to the concessional rate of tax as provided under the law. In view of this settled legal position, the question whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on the facts in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the assessee-company as an industrial company when the assessee was. engaged in the business of ginning and processing of cotton could not be referred.

CIT v. Lakhtar Cotton Press Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (1983) 142 ITR 503 (Guj.) ref.

Manish R. Bhatt for Applicant.

JUDGMENT

The Revenue has made these applications suggesting the following question common to all these matters and requesting for a direction on the Tribunal to forward the statement of case under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:

"Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in directing the Assessing Officer to treat the assessee-company as an industrial company when the assessee was engaged in the business of ginning and processing of cotton?"

A similar question had arisen in respect of the same assessee in Income-tax Reference No. 10 of 1979. A Division Bench of this Court, by its judgment and order, dated March a, 1986, decided the question in the affirmative and against the Revenue following an earlier decision of this Court in CIT v Lakhtar Cotton Press Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. (1983) 142 ITR 503. In that decision, it was held that, where loose cotton in bulk quantity with lighter density was, as a result of pressing, converted into cotton bales and to that extent it underwent a change, the assessee-company fell within the definition of an industrial company, because it processed cotton into cotton bales and was entitled to the concessional rate of tax as provided under the law.

In view of this settled legal position which was applied in the case of the petitioner-company itself, there does not arise any question as suggested by the applicant for an opinion of this Court which, as noted above, is already given. All these applications are, therefore, rejected.

M.B.A./88/FCApplication rejected.