{"id":3891,"date":"2011-11-18T04:27:45","date_gmt":"2011-11-18T04:27:45","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?p=3891"},"modified":"2011-11-18T04:27:45","modified_gmt":"2011-11-18T04:27:45","slug":"cit-vs-jyoti-plastic-works-pvt-ltd-bombay-high-court-for-s-80-ib-workers-need-not-be-employees","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/cit-vs-jyoti-plastic-works-pvt-ltd-bombay-high-court-for-s-80-ib-workers-need-not-be-employees\/","title":{"rendered":"CIT vs. Jyoti Plastic Works Pvt Ltd (Bombay High Court)"},"content":{"rendered":"<table width=\"150\" border=\"0\" align=\"right\">\n<tr>\n<td><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/?dl_id=546\" onclick=\"if (event.button==0) \r\n     setTimeout(function () { window.location = 'http:\/\/itatonline.org\/downloads.php?varname=dl_id=546&varname2=jyoti_plastic_80IB_workers.pdf'; }, 100)\" ><strong>Click here to download the judgement (jyoti_plastic_80IB_workers.pdf) <\/strong> <\/a><\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<p><strong><br \/>\nFor s. 80-IB \u201cworkers\u201d need not be \u201cemployees\u201d<br \/>\n<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The assesee was engaged in the manufacture of goods by using job workers; its total number of permanent employees was less than ten. The department relied on <strong>Venus Auto Pvt Ltd vs. CIT<\/strong> 321 ITR 504 (All) and claimed that the <em>non-employment of at least 10 workers was in breach of s. 80IB(2)(iv)<\/em> and deduction u\/s 80IB was not admissible. This was reversed by the Tribunal. On appeal by the department, HELD dismissing the appeal:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nS. 80IB(2)(iv)(iii) provides that an industrial undertaking must \u201c<em>employ<\/em>\u201d ten or more workers in a manufacturing process carried on with the aid of power. <strong>The expression \u2018worker\u2019 which is not defined in the Act means any person employed by the assessee directly or by or through any agency (including a contractor)<\/strong>. What is relevant is the employment of ten or more workers and not the mode and the manner of employment. The fact that the <strong>employer \u2013 employee relationship between the workers employed by the assessee differs<\/strong> cannot be a ground to deny deduction u\/s 80IB (<strong>Sawyer\u2019s Asia Ltd<\/strong> 122 ITR 259 (Bom) followed; <strong>Venus Auto Private Limited<\/strong> 321 ITR 504 (All) <em>dissented from<\/em>).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><!--\n\n\n\n\n\n\/\/--><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 80IB(2)(iv)(iii) provides that an industrial undertaking must \u201c<em>employ<\/em>\u201d ten or more workers in a manufacturing process carried on with the aid of power. <strong>The expression \u2018worker\u2019 which is not defined in the Act means any person employed by the assessee directly or by or through any agency (including a contractor)<\/strong>. What is relevant is the employment of ten or more workers and not the mode and the manner of employment. The fact that the <strong>employer \u2013 employee relationship between the workers employed by the assessee differs<\/strong> cannot be a ground to deny deduction u\/s 80IB (<strong>Sawyer\u2019s Asia Ltd<\/strong> 122 ITR 259 (Bom) followed; <strong>Venus Auto Private Limited<\/strong> 321 ITR 504 (All) <em>dissented from<\/em>)<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/cit-vs-jyoti-plastic-works-pvt-ltd-bombay-high-court-for-s-80-ib-workers-need-not-be-employees\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[4,5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3891","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-judgements","category-high-court"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3891","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3891"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3891\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3891"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3891"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3891"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}