V.K.SINGHAL, J. - (1.) THE Tribunal has referred the following question of law arising out of the order dt. 20th Nov., 1980 under S. 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of asst. year 1972 -73 : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that electric motors and starters are part and parcel of the plant and machinery and, therefore, they are entitled to extra shift depreciation allowance" ?
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a manufacturer of Vanaspati and for the establishment of its unit it purchased the electric motor and starters. The claim for extra -shift depreciation allowance was made on the purchase of motor and starters. The assessee contended that the motor and starters are part and parcel of the machinery and, therefore, it should not be considered as electric machinery. On behalf of the Revenue, it was submitted that the process of electricity can be divided into three parts, (i) the generation of energy, (ii) distribution and transmission of energy so generated, and (iii) actual feeding of machinery which are to be moved by the electricity. The Tribunal was of the opinion that the motor and starters are operated by electricity as well as from diesel and battery, etc., and the motors which are operated by battery cannot be considered to be electric machinery and simply because they are operated by electricity it was found that the function is to impart motion to same machinery to which it is attached. So every motor is not connected with electricity and simply because some of the motors are operated by the electricity, it cannot be said that the motors are not the part and parcel of the machinery. The claim for extra -shift depreciation allowance was allowed.
(3.) WE have considered over the arguments of the learned counsel for Revenue. Learned counsel submits that extra -shift depreciation allowance is not allowed in respect of the items of machinery or plant which have been specified under appendix. Under r. 5 of the IT Rules no extra -shift allowance can be allowed in respect of the items which have been mentioned thereunder. At Item No. 1 electrical machinery with switch gear at their starting point and wiring and fitting of electric light and fans have been specified and as such even if an item falls within the category of plant and machinery, still the benefit of extra -shift depreciation allowance will not be available if it falls in the category of electric machinery. It is not in dispute that the electric motor and starter fall within the term machinery. The only point to be decided is as to whether they could be said to be electric machinery. In CIT vs. Mir Mohammad Ali (1964) 53 ITR 165 (SC), it was observed by the apex Court that the machinery is a word of common parlance and not a technical word. The meaning given in common parlance has to be given. The Judicial Committee in the case of Corporation of Calcutta vs. Chairman Cossipur & Chitpur Municipality 1922 ILR 49 Cal 190 (PC) observed that the word machinery when used in ordinary sense, prima facie means some mechanical contrivances which, by themselves or in combination with one or more mechanical contrivances, by the combined movement and interdependent operation of their respective parts generate power or evoke, modify, apply or direct natural forces with the object in each case of effecting a definite and specific result.;