Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Nila Construction Co
High Court
17 Sep 2001 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · gujarathc
Parties
Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Nila Construction Co
Date of order
17 Sep 2001
Assessment year(s)
1984-85
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income-Tax v. Nila Construction Co, the High Court (2001) decided the matter.
Issue: Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus NILA CONSTRUCTION CO. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
INCOME TAX REFERENCE No 145 of 1993
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
and
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
============================================================
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO
--------------------------------------------------------------
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX
Versus
NILA CONSTRUCTION CO.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Appearance:
1. INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 145 of 1993
MR AKIL KURESHI with MR MANISH R BHATT for Petitioner
Notice Served for Respondent No. 1
--------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH
and
MR.JUSTICE D.A.MEHTA
Date of decision: 18/09/2001
ORAL JUDGEMENT
(Per : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH)
�In this reference at the instance of the revenue,
the following question has been referred for the opinion of this Court in respect of assessment year 1984-85 :-
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that the assessee is an industrial undertaking and thereby entitled to deduction under sec. 80HH of the I.T. Act ?"
2.�We have heard Mr Akil Kureshi, learned counsel for the revenue. Though served, none appears for the respondent-assessee.
3.�The learned counsel for the revenue submits that
since the assessee is a firm engaged in the construction activity, it cannot be said to be engaged in any manufacturing or production activity and is, therefore, not entitled to deduction under Section 80HH of the Act. The learned counsel heavily has relied on the decision of the Apex Court in CIT vs. N.C. Budharaja and Co., 204 ITR 412.
4.�Having heard the learned counsel for the revenue
and having gone through the aforesaid decision, we find that there is considerable substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the revenue. We accordingly hold that the assessee, a firm engaged in construction activity cannot be said to be an industrial undertaking and is, therefore, not entitled to deduction under Section 80HH of the Act. We accordingly answer the question in the negative i.e. in favour of the revenue and against the assessee.
�The reference accordingly stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
�����(M.S. Shah, J.)
�����(D.A. Mehta, J.)
sundar/-
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.