Case: STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS Vs. RAJASTHAN ICE AND COLD STORAGE AND OTHERS

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. It is stated that the respondent-firm, Rajasthan Ice and Cold Storage, Jodhpur, was, inter alia, carrying on the business of cold storage and in the writ petition filed before the High Court, it was contended that the goods storage was the process of refrigeration and, therefore, it was an industry entitled to be charged electricity duty at a reduced rate as per the notification dated November 1, 1965. That petition was allowed. Hence, this appeal. 3. The issue involved in this appeal is covered by the decision of this court rendered in Delhi Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, . In that case, the court considered the question-whether the respondent-company can be held to be an industrial company for the purpose of Section 2(7)(c) of the Finance Act, 1973. After considering the various decisions and the definition of industrial company as defined u/s 2(7)(c) of the Finance Act, the court observed that the company should be, inter alia, engaged in process of goods. The court thereafter held that in a cold storage, vegetables, fruits and several other articles which require preservation by refrigeration are stored. As a result of long storage, scientific examination may indicate loss of moisture content, that is not sufficient for holding that the stored articles have undergone a process and hence not an industrial company. 4. In Rajasthan State Electricity Board Vs. Associated Stone Industries and Another, , dealing with the notifications in question, this court held that the word manufacture used in the notifications should be understood in its commercial sense in the absence of definition in the statute itself. In that case, the question involved was energy consumed for pumping out water from the mines and the court held that it cannot be held to be manufacturing activity.

Decision (1 = appeal accepted, 0 = rejected): 1

Explanation:
1[ds]3. The issue involved in this appeal is covered by the decision of this court rendered in Delhi Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, New Delhi, . In that case, the court considered the question-whether the respondent-company can be held to be an industrial company for the purpose of Section 2(7)(c) of the Finance Act, 1973. After considering the various decisions and the definition of industrial company as defined u/s 2(7)(c) of the Finance Act, the court observed that the company should be, inter alia, engaged in process of goods. The court thereafter held that in a cold storage, vegetables, fruits and several other articles which require preservation by refrigeration are stored. As a result of long storage, scientific examination may indicate loss of moisture content, that is not sufficient for holding that the stored articles have undergone a process and hence not an industrial company.4. In Rajasthan State Electricity Board Vs. Associated Stone Industries and Another, , dealing with the notifications in question, this court held that the word manufacture used in the notifications should be understood in its commercial sense in the absence of definition in the statute itself. In that case, the question involved was energy consumed for pumping out water from the mines and the court held that it cannot be held to be manufacturing activity.