JUDGMENT
B.N. Kirpal, J.
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has stated the case and referred the following question of law to this court :
“Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in treating the assessed-company as an industrial company for the purpose of rate of tax applicable to it ?”
2. The facts as found by the Tribunal are that the assessed is a public limited company engaged in the business of construction and sale of flats in multi-storeyed commercial buildings. In respect of the assessment year 1976-77, it claimed that it was an industrial undertaking within the meaning of section 2(9)(c) of the Finance Act, 1976. This claim was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer. An appeal was preferred by the assessed and the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the same, holding it to be an industrial undertaking.
3. The Revenue then filed an appeal to the Tribunal, but without success. Thereafter, the aforesaid question of law has been referred to this court.
4. The point in issue stands concluded by the Division Bench decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Minocha Bros. (P.) Ltd. [1986] 160 ITR 134. It was held by this court that a company engaged in the business of constructing buildings cannot be regarded as an industrial company within the meaning of the aforesaid provision. Following this decision, our answer to the aforesaid question of law is in the negative and in favor of the Revenue. There will, however, be no order as to costs.