S.C : The Revenue has been unable to show us any judgment of a Court of this country or abroad which takes the view that the processing of data is not the processing of goods.

Supreme Court Of India

CIT vs. Peerless Consultancy & Services (P) Ltd.

Sections 32A, 1981FA 2(7)(c)

Asst. Year 1981-82

S.P. Bharucha, D.P. Mohapatra & Y.K. Sabharwal, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 11552 of 1995

1st November, 2000

ORDER

BY THE COURT :

We have read the judgment under appeal. The AAC and the Tribunal have granted to the respondent-company the benefit that an industrial company gets and accordingly, granted it investment allowance in respect of a generator installed by it. It has been held by them that when the respondent-company processes data on behalf of its clients, it processes goods. Our attention has been drawn to the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in CIT vs. Shaw Wallace & Co. Ltd. (1993) 112 CTR (Cal) 335 : (1993) 201 ITR 17 (Cal) : TC 28R.210 which, in turn, has referred to the judgment of the Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Datacons (P) Ltd. (1985) 47 CTR (Kar) 162 : (1985)155 ITR 66 (Kar) : TC 24R.231. Learned counsel for the Revenue has been unable to show us any judgment of a Court of this country or abroad which takes the view that the processing of data is not the processing of goods. He has sought to take us back to the primary material. It is not the function of this Court to assess such primary material. The primary material, if any, should have been placed before the IT authorities or the Tribunal. The civil appeal is dismissed with costs.

[Citation : 248 ITR 178 ]

Malcare WordPress Security