RAM SURAT RAM (MAURYA), J. - (1.) THE aforementioned appeals have been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) from the common order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 04.10.2004 passed in ITA No. 2523/D/1999, ITA No. 2524/D/1999 and ITA No. 2409/D/2000. The Revenue has proposed the following Substantial Questions of Law, being involved in all these appeals:- "(1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally justified in law, in directing the A.O. to allow the relief u/s 80-I of the Act for assessment years 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1995-96 despite the fact that in the assessment year 1990-91, the issue was restored to the file of the A.O. For fresh adjudication of the case and whether this tantamount to review of it's earlier order? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in treating the assessee as engaged in manufacturing and allowing deduction u/s 80-I in as much as the assessee company is engaged in processing of MS Pipe after coating with zinc and not manufacturing?"
(2.) THESE appeals relate to the assessment years 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1995-96. M/S Aggarwal Tube (P) Ltd. (the assessee) is engaged in the business of galvanizing the mild steel pipes (MS pipes). For the assessment year 1991-92, the assessee filed it's return, under Section 139 (1) (a) of the Act, on 31.10.1991 declaring total loss of Rs. 7,36,241/-. The Assessing Officer issued notice under Section 143 (2) of the Act to the assessee. In response to the notice, the assessee appeared and produced his papers. Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has debited manufacturing expenses to the tune of Rs. 19,66,459, fresh investment allowance of Rs. 5,05,733/- and has claimed deduction under Section 80-I of the Act. The Assessing Officer found that there was some mistake in calculating the manufacturing expenses and after it's correct calculation held total profit of the assessee in the assessment year was Rs. 2,68,882.80 and total business loss and unabsorbed depreciation was Rs. 4,79,391/-. Thus assessed total loss of Rs. 2,10,508/-. Aggrieved from the aforesaid order, the assessee filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income-tax (A), Muzaffar Nagar (CIT(A) and claimed deduction in respect of profits and gains under Section 80-I of the Act. The assessee raised the plea that as the assessee was an industrial undertaking, established within the relevant dates and engaged in the business of galvanizing the iron pipes as such it was entitled for the benefits under Section 80-I of the Act. CIT (A) by the order dated 04.02.1999 held that the work of the assessee is merely coating zinc on the MS pipes for protecting it from the rust as such plant and machinery of the assessee is not involved in manufacture or production of any article or thing and the assessee was not entitled to the benefits under Section 80-I of the Act.
(3.) THE assessee again filed an appeal from the aforesaid order before the Tribunal, who by the impugned order, relying upon the previous order of the Tribunal in the matter of the assesssee for the assessment year 1990-91, in which it was held that raw material used by the assessee is MS pipes and product of the assessee is GI pipes as such plant and machinery of the assessee was not involved in manufacture of an article or thing and it was entitled to the benefits under Section 80-I of the Act, provided benefits of Section 80-I to the assessee. Hence this appeal has been been filed by the Revenue. Since all the appeals were decided by a common judgment and common questions of law are involved in all these appeals between the same parties as such it were consolidated and are decided by common judgment.;