As per case facts, the respondent company, formed for manufacturing silk cloth, had installed a plant for dyeing silk yarn as part of its business. During a chargeable accounting period, ... due to difficulty in obtaining silk yarn because of the war, the plant became idle. Consequently, in August, the company let out the plant to another company on a monthly rent. The High Court of Bombay ruled that the income received as rent was not income from business, stating the asset had ceased to be a commercial asset. The Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax appealed this decision. The question arose whether the rent received from letting out the dyeing plant, which was initially part of its business, constitutes 'income from business' for excess profits tax purposes and is thus assessable. Finally, the Supreme Court held that an asset acquired and used for business purposes does not cease to be a commercial asset merely because it is temporarily out of use or let out to another. The income from such an asset, regardless of how it's exploited, remains profit of the business, and thus the rent was assessable to excess profits tax. The High Court's decision was reversed.