TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court denies deduction claim for civil construction company under Income Tax Act</h1> <h3>SA BUILDERS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND ANOTHER</h3> SA BUILDERS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND ANOTHER - [2007] 289 ITR 26 (SC), 2006 (10) Suppl. SCR 1092, 2007 (15) SCC 147, 2006 (14) ... Issues Involved:Claim for deduction under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 based on manufacturing activity and fulfillment of conditions.Analysis:Claim for Deduction under Section 32AB:The appellant-assessee, a company engaged in civil construction, claimed a deduction under Section 32AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The claim was raised as an additional ground before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh. The Tribunal rejected the claim on two grounds. Firstly, it stated that the appellant was not engaged in any manufacturing activity, making the claim not allowable as per the precedent set in CIT v. N.C. Budharaja & Co. The second ground for rejection was that the claim was not supported by facts on record. The deduction under Section 32AB had specific conditions to be fulfilled, and the Tribunal found that the appellant did not provide sufficient evidence to demonstrate eligibility for the deduction. The High Court, in its judgment, concurred with the Tribunal's view, leading to the dismissal of the appellant's claim.Judicial Opinion:Upon careful consideration of the matter, the Supreme Court affirmed the decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. The Court agreed with the reasons provided by the Tribunal in its order, specifically paragraphs 19-21, which highlighted the lack of manufacturing activity by the appellant and the absence of supporting facts for the deduction claim. Consequently, the Court held that the appellant was not entitled to the deduction sought under Section 32AB. As a result, the appeal was deemed to lack merit and was dismissed by the Supreme Court.This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the key issues involved in the legal matter, the arguments presented by the parties, and the final decision rendered by the Supreme Court based on the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents.
TaxTMI 