https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62226 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the eligibility for investment allowance on plant and machinery used for job work, stating that the assessee was producing a commercially different product and therefore qualified for the allowance. The Tribunal disagreed with the treatment of State Investment Subsidy in the computation of depreciation, ruling that the subsidy should not reduce the cost of assets. Regarding the disallowance of expenditure on tea, snacks, etc., the Tribunal allowed 25% of the expenses as related to staff and regulated the rest as entertainment expenditure. The disallowance of expenditure on project report preparation by KITCO was confirmed. en-us Mon, 12 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:36:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62226 The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision regarding the eligibility for investment allowance on plant and machinery used for job work, stating that the assessee was producing a commercially different product and therefore qualified for the allowance. The Tribunal disagreed with the treatment of State Investment Subsidy in the computation of depreciation, ruling that the subsidy should not reduce the cost of assets. Regarding the disallowance of expenditure on tea, snacks, etc., the Tribunal allowed 25% of the expenses as related to staff and regulated the rest as entertainment expenditure. The disallowance of expenditure on project report preparation by KITCO was confirmed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 12 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=62226