Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1997 DIGILAW 787 (MAD)

Agro Cargo Transport Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax

1997-08-04

K.A.THANIKKACHALAM, K.GNANAPRAKASAM

body1997
Judgment :- K. A. THANIKKACHALAM, J. At the instance of the assessee, the Tribunal referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. "(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expressions 'industrial undertaking' and 'industrial unit' according to section 35D includes an undertaking engaged in the transportation of goods by trucks? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that rule 6AA was not applicable to the assessment year 1981-82 being introduced only with effect from August 1, 1981 ?" The first question relates to whether the expressions" industrial undertaking"and" industrial unit" * according to section 35D includes an under taking engaged in the transportation of goods by trucks. In Agro-Cargo Transport Ltd. v. CIT 1997 (224) ITR 90, 1997 (143) CTR 325, 1997 (91) TAXMAN 44 , 1996 (2) TLR 840 in the case of the same assessee this court held that the assessee is not an industrial undertaking. Inasmuch as the order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with the above cited decision of this court, we answer question No. 1 in the affirmative and against the assessee In so far as question No. 2 is concerned, it relates to relief under section 35B of the Act. The claim is based on rule 6AA which has no application because it was introduced only with effect from August 1, 1981, and with no retrospective effect. So, the claim was rejected by the Tribunal. The order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in CIT v. Bishnauth Tea Co. Ltd. 1992 (197) ITR 150, 1993 (112) CTR 188, 1993 (68) TAXMAN 440, and that of this court in CIT v. S. Palaniswamy 1996 (219) ITR 380, 1996 (134) CTR 507, 1996 (86) TAXMAN 462 , 1996 (2) TLR 721. Inasmuch as the order passed by the Tribunal is in accordance with the above cited decision, we answer the second question referred to us in the affirmative and against the assessee. The tax case is ordered accordingly. No costs.