High Court Of Delhi
M.S. Kold Hold Industries (P) Ltd. vs. CIT
Section 32A
Asst. Year 1981-82, 1985-86
Arijit Pasayat, C.J. & D.K. Jain, J.
IT Appeal No. 104 of 2001
15th October, 2001
Counsel Appeared
M.S. Syali, for the Petitioner : R.D. Jolly with Ms. Premlata Bansal, for the Respondent
JUDGMENT
BY THE COURT :
Heard. This is an appeal under s. 260A of the IT Act, 1961. The dispute relates to the asst. yrs. 1981-82 and 1985-86. The basic issue was whether there was any manufacturing or processing involved in the conversion of carcass into commercially marketable meat. The AO was of the view that there was no commercially different commodity and, therefore, the claim that manufacturing/ processing was involved was not tenable. Great emphasis was laid on the report of the Valuation Officer who had inspected the business premises pursuant to the direction given by the appellate authority. In appeal the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, CIT(A)] reversed the findings. It was observed that there was no doubt that the assessee was engaged in processing the goods and was, therefore, entitled to claim investment allowance.
The Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. After noticing the stands of the parties and the order of the CIT(A), the Tribunal disposed of the matter with the following observations : “In the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue deserves to be allowed. It is seen that the assessee has not been able to establish that any processing activity takes place in the said business. Merely the activity of deboning the meat and selling it as Keema, etc., does not entitle the assessee to claim the benefits under this section.”
2. To say the least, the order is non-speaking and reasons have not been indicated to support the conclusions arrived at. In the aforesaid background it would be appropriate to direct the Tribunal to rehear the matter as reasons have not been indicated by the Tribunal to justify its conclusions. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
Appeal stands disposed of.
Decision in favour of Matter remanded
[Citation : 255 ITR 96]
