COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. LIGHT ROOFINGS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO question are referred to us. One, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that generators would come under the classification of plant and machinery and hence extra-shift allowance has to be allowed; and second, whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that certain liabilities should not be taken into account in the computation of capital employed for allowing relief under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

(2.) THE first question is answered in CIT v. M. S. Sahadevan [1980] 123 ITR 820 by a Division Bench of this court, wherein it is pointed out that wherever the machinery is such that in-built into it is the electric motor, then it would be electrical machinery. THE said view is reiterated by the Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Saran Khandsari Udyog [1993] 204 ITR 447 and the Kerala High Court in CIT v. P. Veriah [1995] 211 ITR 244. It appears the Central Board of Revenue has already issued Circular No. 1454, on the subject. This should satisfy all concerned. Thus, the Tribunal has committed no mistake in not treating a generator as electrical machinery.