TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 on additions made to existing X-ray units and E.C.G. plants, and whether a new objection as to the assessee not being an industrial undertaking could be entertained in reference.
Analysis: The Tribunal had held that even if the added parts were not treated as machinery, they could be treated as plant, and investment allowance was available in respect of both machinery and plant under section 32A. The Department sought to contend for the first time in reference that the assessee, being a doctor, was neither a small scale industrial undertaking nor any other industrial undertaking. That contention had not been raised before the authorities below or before the Tribunal, and no basis was shown for permitting it to be raised for the first time in reference under section 256(1).
Conclusion: The assessee was held entitled to investment allowance, and the reference was answered in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Investment allowance under section 32A could be allowed on plant as well as machinery, and a contention not raised before the authorities below could not be entertained for the first time in reference absent any sufficient basis.
TaxTMI 
