https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71828 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the investment allowance claim for retreading old tyres under section 32A of the IT Act. The Tribunal held that tyre retreading does not result in the creation of a new article, aligning with the Madras High Court's interpretation. Therefore, the Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision and upheld the Revenue's position, emphasizing the lack of new article creation through tyre retreading. en-us Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:06:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71828 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue, denying the investment allowance claim for retreading old tyres under section 32A of the IT Act. The Tribunal held that tyre retreading does not result in the creation of a new article, aligning with the Madras High Court's interpretation. Therefore, the Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision and upheld the Revenue's position, emphasizing the lack of new article creation through tyre retreading. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 13 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=71828