Commissioner Of Income Tax v. Gandhi Spices Ltd.....opponent(S

O/TAXAP/1885/2005 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1885 of 2005 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 ?the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?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 ?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 ? ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s) Versus GANDHI SPICES LTD.....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR PRANAV G DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1MRS SWATI SOPARKAR, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERIandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 13/11/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1.By way of this appeal, the appellant-revenue has challenged the judgment and order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench in ITA No. 447/Rjt/2004 for the assessment year 1998-99. 2.While admitting this appeal on 2.8.2006, this Court has framed the following substantial questions of law: [A] Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the process of production in the case of the assessee is required to be treated as “manufacturing” within the provisions of sec. 80-IA of the IT Act ? [B] Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing process and entitled to claim deduction 3.The facts of the present case are that the return declaring total income of Rs. 6,24,750/- was filed by the assessee company on 2[nd] November, 1998. The same was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) without making any prima-facie adjustment. The case was selected for scrutiny and notice u/s. 143(2) was issued to the assessee. Ultimately, after considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. Against which, the assessee has preferred an appeal before CIT(A) which was partly allowed. Against the said order of CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred an appeal before the Income-tax after considering the material on record, the assessment order came to be passed. Against which, the assessee has preferred an appeal before CIT(A) which was partly allowed. Against the said order of CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred an appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot which was dismissed, and against the said order of Tribunal, the Revenue has preferred this Tax Appeal. 4.Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considered the submissions. In our view, the amount involved in the present case is small one and the revenue effect is less than Rs. 1 lakh, and therefore, as per CDBT Instruction No. 1979 dated 27[th] March, 2000, the revenue ought not to have come in appeal where the total revenue effect is less than Rs. 1 lakh, and therefore, this appeal is not entertained. The questions are answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. This appeal is dismissed accordingly. mandora (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J)