SHRI S.K. GOLCHA (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the process undertaken by the assessee, involving breaking boulders, removing impurities, crushing, and grading soapstone into powder, resulted in a distinct and marketable article. Therefore, it constituted production and manufacture, making the assessee eligible for deductions under sections 80-I and 80-IA.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under sections 80-I and 80-IA for its industrial units involved in processing soapstone. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied this deduction, holding that the process of crushing boulders into smaller sizes and powder did not constitute 'manufacture' or 'production'. This led to appeals before the CIT(A) and subsequently the ITAT.
What were the issues?
Whether the process of crushing and grading soapstone into powder amounts to 'manufacture' or 'production' for the purpose of claiming deductions under sections 80-I and 80-IA of the Income Tax Act.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(11)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. N.C. Budharaja & Co.164 citing204 ITR 412 · 1993 · SC
- CIT v. Sesa Goa Ltd.92 citing271 ITR 331 · 2004 · SC
- ITO v. Arihant Tiles and Marbles Pvt. Ltd.88 citing320 ITR 79 · 2010 · SC · Read judgment
- Lucky Minmat v. CIT12 citing245 ITR 830 · 2000 · SC
- Shri S.K. Golcha (HUF) v. ACIT7 citing226 ITR 245 · 1997
- CIT v. Mysore Minerals Ltd.6 citing250 ITR 725 · 2001 · HC
- Lucky Minmat (P) Ltd. v. CIT6 citing9 SCC 669 · 2001
- CIT v. Best Chem & Limestone Industries (P) Ltd.4 citing210 ITR 883 · 1994 · HC
- Bheraghat Mineral Industries v. Divisional Deputy Commissioner3 citing79 STC 156 · 1990 · HC
- CIT v. N C Buddhiraja3 citing204 ITR 413 · SC
- CIT v. Premier Construction Co.3 citing242 ITR 654
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES”B”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 789 &790/JP/2017 & 245/JP/2018
PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. These three appeals are directed against three separate orders of CIT(A), dated 02.08.2017 for the assessment years 1997-98 & 1998-99 and dated 29.11.2017 for the assessment year 1996-97 respectively. The assessee has raised common grounds in these appeals and the grounds raised for the assessment year 1997-98 are as under:-
ITA No. 789& 790/JP/2017 & 245/JP/2018 Shri S.K.
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 80-I
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Helathcare LtdITA/271/20095 Feb 2026
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare LtdITA/266/20095 Feb 2026
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare LtdITA/265/20095 Feb 2026
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare LtdITA/267/20094 Feb 2026
- CIT Chandigarh vs M/S Smithkline Beecham ConsumerITA/351/200729 Jan 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Iyyanan Eswaran vs. The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (St) (GST)Madras · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Dc Security Services vs. Commissioner Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shreekanth Enterprises vs. Joint Commissioner AppealsUttarakhand · 14 Oct 2026
- Sharad Ashok Agarwal vs. State Of Maharashtra Through G.P. And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026