:1: IN IN IN THE THE THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL LODGING NO.675 OF 2007 Commissioner of Income Tax-25. ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Dimac Industries. ..Respondent. Mr.A.D.Kango with P.S.Sahadevan for the Appellant. Mr. B.V.Jhaveri with Ms. Preeti Shukla for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED : 22nd January,2008 PC : 1. The appellant has framed three questions of law. However, for deciding this appeal the relevant question of law is (b) and the same is reproduced as under. (b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon’ble Tribunal was justified in holding that the Assessee’s activity can be considered as manufacturing activity since the Assessee is only crushing the Manganese Ore to the Manganese powder? 2. The Commissioner (Appeals) in the appeal preferred by the respondent herein was pleased to hold that the act of the respondent amounts to manufacture by recording a finding of the various acts involved and the use in various industrial or finished products pursuant to the requirement of manganese in different concentrates or percentages. The acts of assorting at :2: input level, blending, crushing, removal of silica and separation of Fe+FeO and chemical testing in lab for ensuring required quality, that it was held all are an integral process of manufacture. In other words, what the Commissioner (Appeals) held was that the product after it under went the processes would be a different and commercially distinct product. 3. The Tribunal relied on the judgment of this court in the case of CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. reported in (2004) 266 ITR 126 as affirmed by the Supreme Court in the case CIT Vs. Sesa Goa Ltd. reported in 271 ITR 331(S.C.) and confirmed the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. In our opinion, considering that the expression ’production’ is of much wider amplitude than the expression manufacture and the the finding of fact recorded, even if it is held that the act does not amount to manufacture it still will amount to production. 5. We therefore, on the finding of fact recorded are of the view that no fault can be found in the judgment of the tribunal and consequently the question of law as framed would not arise. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO, J.)