Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Pawan Agarwal and others that the activity of drawing wires of thinner gauges from wires and rods of thicker gauges amount to manufacture as the paper insulated wires
The Hon’ble Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Swastik Foods held that the rejection of basis by merely expressing a doubt about the correctness of profit declared taking inconsistent GP ratio as basis cannot be a said to be rejection of books for incompleteness or incorrectness.
Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case of M/s Palam Gas Service Vs. CIT held that execution of outsourced transportation work without any assistance from the outsourcer is a clear case of sub-contracting making the person outsourcing his contract liable to deduct tax on the payments made to sub-contractors u/s 194C.
High Court in the case of CIT vs. M/s Himachal Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. held that the excess provision for bad and doubtful debts written back by way of credit to Profit and Loss A/c is deductible while arriving at the book profits.
As far as conversion of limestone into limestone powder is concerned, The Apex Court has clearly held that the conversion into lime and lime dust or concrete by stone crushers can legitimately be considered to be a manufacturing process while the mere mining of limestone and marble and cutting the same would not be so considered. The observation of the Supreme Court cannot be termed to be ‘obiter dicta’ since the Supreme Court has held that the process of conversion of limestone into lime and lime dust is a manufacturing process.
In the instant case, as noticed hereinabove, the assessee’s wife though was in possession of technical qualification but the assessee was required to prove conclusively that his wife Smt. Nanda Chhajta was in fact looking after plans for execution work and was taking administrative decisions.
If the assessee satisfies the assessing authority that the expenditure is not in violation of the regulations framed by the medical council then it may legitimately claim a deduction, but it is for the assessee to satisfy the assessing officer that the expense is not in violation of the Medical Council Regulations referred to above.
We are dealing with cases where though the amount was not deposited by the due date under the Welfare Acts, it was definitely deposited before furnishing the returns. We see no reason to make any distinction between the employees’ contribution or the employers’ contribution.
There can be no dispute with the proposition that the word ‘attributable’ is much wider in scope than ‘derived’. The Legislature has used the words ‘attributable to’ in conjunction with the phrase ‘anyone or more of such activities’. The investment of the funds by the banks including the non-reserves was part of the banking activities since no bank would like its reserve funds to remain idle and not earn any interest.
No doubt, payment of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C is mandatory but it is for the Assessing Authority while passing the original assessment order or while passing the reassessment or rectification order to direct payment of interest.
