Commissioner of Income-tax Bangalore-III, Bangalore / Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore v. Saint Gobain Crystal and Detectors (I) Ltd
|Commissioner of Income-tax Bangalore-III, Bangalore / Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore
|Saint Gobain Crystal and Detectors (I) Ltd.
|HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
|Date of Order
|substantial question of law • manufacturing activity
|Mr.Ankur Pai, learned counsel for the assessee. This appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the revenue which was admitted by a Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.06.2013 on the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing activities while the assessee is only polishing the crystals and 3 thereafter assembling the glass and crystals. The process undertaken by the assessee would not bring anything new into existence. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Union India Vs. Delhi Cloth General Merchants Co. Ltd. reported in 1963 AIR SC 791 has differentiated processing from manufacturing 3. When the matter was taken up today, learned counsel for the parties jointly submitted that the substantial question of law has been answered by a Bench of this Court vide judgment dated 19.01.2015 passed in ITA No.351/2009 c/w ITA No.352/2009. In view of the aforesaid submissions and for the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgment, the substantial question of law framed in this appeal is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. 4 In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed.