COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs INDIAN SMELTING and REFINING COMPANY LTD.

Sugla, J. - The two questions of law referred to us in this reference at the instance of the Revenue are :

(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee company was a company in which the public were substantially interested during the two years under reference ?

(2) Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the word Building would also include an addition to the building and accordingly the assessee is entitled to initial depreciation on the cost of the additional floor constructed on the building during the year under reference ?

The first question came up for consideration before us today in IT Ref. No. 319 of 1975. Following our judgment of this date in that case, the first question is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.

As regards the second question, it is seen that the Tribunal has, for coming to the conclusion in favour of the assessee, followed the Supreme Courts decision in COMMISSIONER OF Income Tax, MADRAS Vs. MIR MOHAMMAD ALI. ARUNA MILLS LTD. : INTERVENER., and this Courts decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay City II Vs. London Hotel, . There being no dispute that the question herein is covered by the above two decisions, we answer the second question of law also in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee.

In the result, both the questions of law are answered in the affirmative and in favour of the assessee with no order as to costs.