Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 5
CASE NO.:
Appeal (civil) 8832-8833 of 1997
PETITIONER:
M/S. ASPINWALL & CO. LTD.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ERNAKULAM
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/09/2001
BENCH:
S.P. Bharucha, Y.K. Sabharwal & Ashok Bhan
JUDGMENT:
Ashok Bhan, J.
Aggrieved by the judgment/order of the High Court, the assessee-
appellant has come up in appeal. By the impugned judgment, the High
Court in a reference made under Section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act,
1961 (for short, the Act) by the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin
(for short the Tribunal) has answered the following question of law in the
negative.
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the
Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that the assessees
activity of curing coffee amounts to manufacturing and the
assessee is entitled to relief under Section 32A of the Income-
tax Act?
i.e. against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.
The High Court opined that the assessee is not entitled to the
investment allowance under Section 32A of the Act in respect of the
machinery used for curing coffee and its sale.
The relevant facts giving rise to the above question of law are:-
The Assessment Years in question are 1980-1981 and 1983-1984.
The assessee is a public limited company. It is engaged in the export of coir
products, distribution of insecticides and pesticides, running and managing
of estates on service contracts. In addition, the assessee has coffee curing
plants. For the machinery installed for curing of the coffee, the assessee
claimed investment allowance under Section 32A for both the Assessment
Years. The Income Tax Officer held that the assessee was not entitled to the
investment allowance. Assessee preferred appeal before the Commissioner
of Income-Tax (Appeals) [for short C.I.T. (Appeals)] who allowed the
appeals and held that the assessee was entitled to the investment allowance
as provided under Section 32A of the Act.
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 5
On further appeal by the revenue, the Tribunal noticed that a similar
issue had come before it in ITA No.421/Coch/1984 in the assessees own
case wherein the Tribunal had held that the assessee was entitled to the
investment allowance. Following its earlier decision, the Tribunal upheld
the order of C.I.T. (Appeals).
The matter was taken up in reference before the High Court. To
ascertain the factual position as to what is meant by curing of coffee, the
Court directed the counsel for the parties to produce the order of the
Tribunal for the earlier Assessment Year, which was taken on record.
To appreciate as to what is understood by the word coffee as is
generally known in the commercial parlance, the High Court referred to the
Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 6 (1972 edition) and concluded that
coffee is a beverage made from the roasted seeds (beans) of the coffee
plant. The said beverage is consumed as either a hot or cold drink and is
considered to be having an invigorating effect. Coffee is prepared by either
a dry or a wash process. In the dry process, known as natural process, the
coffee cherries are thoroughly rinsed in water and then spread out on cement
patios in the open air and sun to dry. After drying, the coffee is repeatedly
run through fanning and hulling machines to remove the hulls, dried pulp
and parchment. As against this, the wash process is quite different. In this
process, the cherries are first put through a pulping machine that breaks them
open and virtually squeezes the beans out of the pulpy skin. Such beans go
into large tanks where they are left for about 24 hours. Fermentation in the
process is avoided, because it loosens what is known as a jelly like substance
understood as honey in regard thereto. Even in this process, after washing,
the coffee is spread out in patios to dry. It takes two to three weeks in the
sun for the coffee to become thoroughly dried and during this time it
requires shuffling and turning over so as to give sufficient natural heat
depending on the climatic conditions. The usual expected aroma is available
only after the process of roasting. Roasting also changes the colour giving it
a brown colour and a consequent process of chemical change also. The
process of roasting brings with its splendid aromatic qualities and pleasing
taste.
It was noticed that the Tribunal had inspected the factory premises to
have a first-hand knowledge of the operations carried on by the assessee-
Company. The inspection was made by the Tribunal in the presence of both
the parties through their representatives. The factual observation of the
Tribunal as a result of the inspection found that following nine processes are
involved in curing of coffee:
(1) Receipt of coffee from the Estates;
(2) Storage of coffee in covered godowns;
(3) Drying of coffee to the required standards prescribed by the
coffee Board in drying yards;
(4) Hulling/Pealing/Polishing;
(5) Grading of coffee mechanically;
(6) Colour sorting;
(7) Garbling and manual grading;
(8) Out-turning of garbled coffee; and
(9) Bulking.
The Tribunal also found that to deal with the nine processes, the
assessee has the factory area where godowns for storage of
uncured/clean coffee, coffee drying yards, machine rooms, garbling
sheds, etc. are located.
Curing operations start with the drying of coffee in the drying
yards in bright sunlight. Then comes the stage of hulling. It means,
the outer husk of the coffee bean has to be carefully removed, if
necessary, by mechanical operations to obtain coffee seeds which can
further be processed. The Tribunal found that in the hulling process
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 5
pre-cleaning, destining, elimination of husk, separation of unhulled
beans and polishing is done. Thereafter gradation is done. The
process of gradation requires separation of good coffee for the
purpose of grading by a process of what is known as garbling/manual
grading. At times, the process of gradation is done by mechanical
means as well. After grading the polishing is done on the basis of
grading. The Tribunal held that in this process assessee was involved
in the activity of manufacturing the coffee beans from the raw
material plucked from the plant.
The High Court accepted the factual matrix but in conclusion as
to whether it amounts to manufacturing activity differed with the
Tribunal and held:
We find that all the nine stages of the process do not
show any kind of change or a commercially different
commodity is not seen to be passing through the various
stages of the process. It cannot be ignored that in common
parlance, coffee means, coffee powder, a beverage
consumed as either a hot or cold drink. At no stage, this
colour combination between manufacture and production
has its manifestation.
The relevant portion of Section 32A is reproduced below:
32A. (1) In respect of a ship or an aircraft or
machinery or plant specified in sub-section (2), which is
owned by the assessee and is wholly used for the
purposes of the business carried on by him, there shall, in
accordance with and subject to the provisions of this
section, be allowed a deduction, in respect of the
previous year in which the ship or aircraft was acquired
or the machinery or plant was installed or, if the ship,
aircraft, machinery or plant is first put to use in the
immediately succeeding previous year, then, in respect of
that previous year, of a sum by way of investment
allowance equal to twenty-five per cent of the actual cost
of the ship, aircraft, machinery or plant to the assessee:
Provided that no deduction shall be allowed under this
section in respect of -
(a) xxx xxx xxx
(b) xxx xxx xxx
(c) xxx xxx xxx
(d) xxx xxx xxx
(2) The ship or aircraft or machinery or plant referred to in
sub-section (1) shall be the following, namely:-
(a) xxx xxx xxx
(b) xxx xxx xxx
(i) xxx xxx xxx
(ii) xxx xxx xxx
(iii) in any other industrial undertaking for the purposes
of business of construction, manufacture or
production of any article or thing, not being an
article or thing specified in the list in the Eleventh
Schedule.).
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 5
The short point for consideration is whether the High Court was
right in coming to the conclusion that the assessee was not
involved in any manufacturing or production activity in the process
of curing the coffee.
The word manufacture has not been defined in the Act. In the
absence of a definition of the word manufacture it has to be given a
meaning as is understood in common parlance. It is to be understood
as meaning the production of articles for use from raw or prepared
materials by giving such materials new forms, qualities or
combinations whether by hand labour or machines. If the change
made in the article results in a new and different article then it would
amount to a manufacturing activity.
This Court while determining as to what would amount to a
manufacturing activity held in Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax v.
M/s. Pio Food Packers, 1980 Supp. SCC 174: that the test for
determination whether manufacture can be said to have taken place is
whether the commodity which is subjected to the process of
manufacture can no longer be regarded as the original commodity, but
is recognized in the trade as a new and distinct commodity. It was
observed:
Commonly manufacture is the end result of one or more
processes through which the original commodity is made
to pass. The nature and extent of processing may vary
from one case to another, and indeed there may be
several stages of processing and perhaps a different kind
of processing at each stage. With each process suffered,
the original commodity experiences a change. But it is
only when the change, or a series of changes, take the
commodity to the point where commercially it can no
longer be regarded as the original commodity but instead
is recognized as a new and distinct article that a
manufacture can be said to take place.
Adverting to facts of the present case, the assessee after
plucking or receiving the raw coffee berries makes it undergo nine
processes to give it the shape of coffee beans. The net product is
absolutely different and separate from the input. The change made in
the article results in a new and different article which is recognized in
the trade as a new and distinct commodity. The coffee beans have an
independent identity distinct from raw material from which it was
manufactured. A distinct change comes about in the finished product.
Submission of the learned counsel for the Revenue that the
assessee was doing only the processing work and was not involved in
the manufacture and producing of a new article cannot be accepted.
The process is a manufacturing process when it brings out a complete
transformation in the original article so as to produce a commercially
different article or commodity. That process itself may consist of
several processes. The different processes are integrally connected
which results in the production of a commercially different article. If
a commercially different article or commodity results after processing
then it would be a manufacturing activity. The assessee after
processing the raw berries converts them into coffee beans which is
commercially different commodity. Conversion of the raw berry into
coffee beans would be a manufacturing activity.
For the reasons stated above, we are of the opinion that the
High Court was wrong in its opinion that the processing of the raw
berries into coffee beans ready for consumption would not be a
manufacturing activity disentitling the assessee to the investment
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 5
allowance provided under Section 32A of the Act.
Accordingly, the appeals are allowed with costs. The impugned
order/judgment of the High Court is set aside and that of the Tribunal
is restored. The question of law is answered in the affirmative i.e. in
favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
.J.
(S.P. Bharucha)
.J.
(Y.K. Sabharwal)
.J.
(Ashok Bhan)
September 05, 2001