https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178543 The Tribunal ruled against the assessee regarding the claim for investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, citing that construction of roads, tunnels, and bridges does not qualify for the allowance. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on the disallowance of interest paid on deposits exceeding 15% per annum. Other issues raised by the assessee were left unanswered due to lack of representation, resulting in decisions made according to the circumstances. en-us Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Feb 2016 15:05:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178543 The Tribunal ruled against the assessee regarding the claim for investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, citing that construction of roads, tunnels, and bridges does not qualify for the allowance. However, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee on the disallowance of interest paid on deposits exceeding 15% per annum. Other issues raised by the assessee were left unanswered due to lack of representation, resulting in decisions made according to the circumstances. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 18 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178543