COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. R.L.SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Shri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri R.R. Agarwal and Shri Suyash Agarwal for the respondent. It is sufficient to refer to the pleadings of Income Tax Appeal No.9 of 2003, for deciding both the appeals.

(2.) THIS appeal under Section 260 -A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the "Act, 1961") has been filed against the judgment and order dated 25/1/2002, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi (hereinafter called the "Tribunal") in I.T.A. Nos.6810 & 8864 (Del)/81 for the Assessment Years 1987 -88 and 88 -89. The Assessing Officer by the assessment order dated 31/3/1987 rejected the claim of the assessee under Sections 80HH and 80I of the Act, 1961. The assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of (Appeals) which was decided by order of the Commissioner dated 29/8/1991 allowing the appeal partly. Insofar as deductions under Section 80 -HH and 80 -I of the Act are concerned, the said ground was not allowed by the appellate authority. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, an appeal was filed before the Tribunal which has been allowed by the judgment and order dated 25/1/2002 by the Tribunal against which the appellanthas come up in the appeal. The appeal was admitted on the following two questions of law:

(3.) THE submission which has been pressed by the learned counsel for the Department is that the appellant is not engaged in manufacturing process and is not producing any article and conditions which were mentioned in sub -section 2 of Section 80 - HH of the Act, are not present. No production activities are being carried out and the condition precedent being not fulfilled, the benefit to the assessee under Section 80 -HH of the Act has been erroneously granted.