COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. SKY ROOM PVT LTD
LAWS(CAL)-1989-3-75
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on March 07,1989

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Appellant
VERSUS
SKY ROOM PVT LTD. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Suhas Chandra Sen, J. - (1.) The Tribunal has referred the following question of law to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee can be treated as an industrial company ?" The assessment year involved is 1975-76. The assessee is engaged in business which consists wholly in processing goods, rendering them edible and then selling them in its restaurant as foodstuffs and eatables. The foodstuffs and eatables were prepared on the orders placed by customers. The dispute in this case is as to whether the company can be described as an industrial company. The Tribunal held that preparation of food articles in the case of the assessee would also amount to processing. It further held that the meaning of the word "manufacture" or "processing" should not be confined to non-edible stuff.
(2.) The correctness of the conclusion of the Tribunal has been challenged by the Department. The definition of "industrial company" as given by the Finance Act, 1975, is as under : "2(8)(c) 'industrial company', means a company which is mainly engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the construction, of ships or in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining. Explanation.--For the purposes of this clause, a company shall be deemed to be mainly engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the construction of ships or in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining, if the income attributable to any one or more of the aforesaid activities included in its total income of the previous year (as computed before making any deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income-tax Act) is not less than fifty-one per cent. of such total income." Mr. Dhar has contended that an industrial company must be a company which is engaged in industrial activity like construction of ships or something of a similar nature. The goods must be some industrial goods which can be utilised in the construction of ships or on the other objects stated in the definition section.
(3.) It appears from the definition that five categories of objects have been mentioned therein. If the company is engaged in the business of generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or in the construction of ships or in the manufacture or processing of goods or in mining, the company will come within the definition of "industrial company". It will be seen that generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power or the construction of ships or mining do not form part of any one particular genus. Mr. Dhar has not been able to satisfy us as to how the doctrine "ejusdem generis" can be invoked in this case. The phrase "processing of goods" cannot take its colour from the other activities mentioned in the definition section.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.