The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the term 'technician' as defined in the explanation to S.10(6)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its application to the specialized knowledge and experience required in industrial or business management techniques.

1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench has referred the following question to us for our decision:

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the Skipper of the fishing Trawler is a 'technician' as laid down in the Explanation to S.10(6)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?"

2. The assessee is one Sri. Mosanobu Nakai, the Skipper of a fishing Trawler, a specialist in the field of fishing by using deep sea going Trawlers, a Japanese, whose services have been obtained by the Blue Bay Fisheries who have been assessed for and on behalf of the said Nakai for the year 1966-67. Nakai was being paid reasonably high salary, Rs. 3000/- per month with other facilities as well and it has been assumed in the proceedings before the Income Tax authorities that the remuneration that he received during the entire accounting period relating to the assessment year fell for consideration of the question of the applicability of the explanation to S.10(6)(vii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for short, the Act. We say so because the period relating to which the salary may fall under the section has not been dealt with by any of the authorities and we are not concerned with this question as this has not been referred to us. The question however arises whether the said Nakai is a technician falling within the definition of that term in the explanation to S.10(6)(vii) of the Act. That definition is in these terms:

"Explanation:-- For the purposes of this sub-clause "technician" means a person having specialised knowledge and experience in:

(i) constructional or manufacturing operations, or in mining or in the generation or distribution of electricity or any other form of power, or

(ii) industrial or business management techniques;

who is employed in India in a capacity in which such specialised knowledge and experience are actually utilised;"

It is admitted that Nakai is employed in India and that he has some specialised knowledge and experience. If he is a technician within the explanation it is the contention of the assessee that he will be entitled to the exemption under S.10(6)(vii)(a) which exempts "such remuneration due to or received by him during the period of six months commencing from the date of his arrival in India". In order that this exemption may be attracted, the technician must have special knowledge and experience in "industrial or business management techniques". The section itself having limited the nature of the techniques or having qualified the word "technician" by the introduction of the words following technician who has "special knowledge and experience in industrial or business management techniques" it is clear that it is only the second limb of the explanation that we have read that falls for consideration in this case and not the first. This is admitted before us. The whole case therefore turned on the interpretation to be placed on the words "industrial or business management techniques" occurring in Clause (ii) in the explanation.

3. On behalf of the assessee, it was contended by counsel that any person who has specialised knowledge and experience which is necessary for the proper working of an industry would fall within the words in the explanation. According to his submission a specialist who is able to perform a specialised task, which may be one among the many task that may have to be performed in an industry will be a technician falling within the explanation. It was further urged that the said Nakai was a specialist in this way. He has specialised knowledge and he has experience in deep sea fishing. Though he is termed a Skipper, he is still a technician because the Skipper's task in a venture such as the one that has been performed by the said Nakai as Skipper required specialised knowledge and experience. We are prepared to assume without deciding that the nature of the work done by the Skipper required specialised knowledge and