(1.) A Common question of law arises for consideration in both the appeals. The appeals are preferred against the judgments of the Bombay High Court in I.T. R. No. 40 of 1969, dated 7-7-1978 and I.T.R. No. 453 of 1975, dated 27-3-1987. Civil Appeal No. 1274 of 1980 preferred against the judgment of the Bombay High Court in I.T. R. No. 40 of 1969 is the main appeal,. The judgment rendered therein is reported in (1979) 119 ITR 164. This judgment was followed in the latter case, I.T.R. No. 453 of 1975.
(2.) In Civil Appeal No. 1274 of 1980, the question arose with reference to the assessment year 1962-63, wherein the interpretation of Section 84 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, as it existed then, came up for consideration. Civil Appeal No. 9796 of 1995 is concerned with the assessment year 1969-70, wherein S. 80-J of the act came up for consideration. It was agreed at the Bar and it is also fairly clear that the controversy in these cases, is regarding the interpretation of the crucial words viz. capital employed in the undertaking occurring both in Sections 84(1) and 80-J of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(3.) We heard counsel.