https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214033 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that undertaking job work can be considered a form of manufacturing or production, entitling the assessee to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The decision aligned with past interpretations of the term "manufacture," which encompass activities beyond traditional manufacturing processes. The court emphasized that job work activities, such as dyeing and printing, could qualify for investment allowance under section 32A, citing relevant case law to support its conclusion. en-us Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 17 Jun 2012 16:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214033 The court ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that undertaking job work can be considered a form of manufacturing or production, entitling the assessee to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The decision aligned with past interpretations of the term "manufacture," which encompass activities beyond traditional manufacturing processes. The court emphasized that job work activities, such as dyeing and printing, could qualify for investment allowance under section 32A, citing relevant case law to support its conclusion. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214033