STANDARD TEA PROCESSING CO.LTD vs. DY. C.I.T.

O/TAXAP/148/2001 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 148 of 2001 With TAX APPEAL NO. 149 of 2001 With TAX APPEAL NO. 150 of 2001 With TAX APPEAL NO. 154 of 2001

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ STANDARD TEA PROCESSING CO.LTD....Appellant(s) Versus DY. C.I.T.....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR JP SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 Page 1 of 4

O/TAXAP/148/2001 JUDGMENT MR NITIN K MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

Date : 24/11/2014

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1. By way of these appeals, the appellant of Tax Appeal No. 148/2001 has challenged the judgment and order dated 29.12.2000 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1974/Ahd/1994 for AY 1990-91. The appellant of Tax Appeal No. 149/2001 has challenged the judgment and order dated 29.12.2000 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 4831/Ahd/1994 for AY 1991-92. The appellant of Tax Appeal No. 150/2001 has challenged the judgment and order dated 29.12.2000 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 3533/Ahd/1993 for AY 1988-89. The appellant of Tax Appeal No. 154/2001 has challenged the judgment and order dated 29.12.2000 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1973/Ahd/1994 for AY 1989-90. 2. While admitting these appeals on 20.6.2001, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law in all these appeals” “Whether the process of blending tea can Page 2 of 4

O/TAXAP/148/2001 JUDGMENT be said to produce an article or thing within the meaning of section 80I of the Income-tax Act, 1961 so as to bring into existence an article or thing which is a different commercial commodity ?” 3. The facts of the present appeals are that the assessee has filed return of income along with audited statement of account and tax audit report. However, a notice u/s. 139(9) was issued to the assessee company on 21.1.91 to furnish certified copy of statutory Auditor’s report. He defect was removed vide letter dated 4.2.1991. The return was processed u/s. 143(1)(a) on 14.3.1991 adjusting the total income at Rs. 14,95,590/- while additing the provision for gratuity and superannuation fund amounting to Rs. 33,180. The order was rectified u/s. 154 of the Act. Thereafter, after considering the material on record, the assessment orders came to be passed. The said assessment orders have been challenged before the CIT(A) which were partly allowed. Against the order of CIT(A), the assessee has preferred appeals before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, being ITA No. 3533/Ahd/1993, ITA No. 1973 & 1974/Ahd/1994 and ITA No. 4831/Ahd/1994. The ITA Nos. 3533/Ahd/93, 1974/Ah/94 and 4831/Ahd/1994 came to be partly allowed, whereas, ITA No. 1973/Ahd/94 came to be dismissed. 4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the Page 3 of 4

O/TAXAP/148/2001 JUDGMENT order passed by the Tribunal in all the above appeals, the assessee has preferred the present Tax Appeals before this Court. 5. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considered the submissions. Mr. Mehta learned advocate appearing for the respondent has pointed out that the issue is governed by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Tara Agencies, reported in 292 ITR 444, which was not disputed by the learned advocate for 6. the appellant. In view of the said decision of the Apex Court, without giving any elaborate reasons, the question is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The present Tax Appeal is dismissed. (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J) mandora Page 4 of 4