https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12769 The High Court ruled against the assessee regarding the claim for investment allowance on compound walls and fencing, disallowing it as buildings cannot be considered as plants for investment allowance purposes. However, the court favored the assessee in allowing guest house expenses as a deduction, holding that such expenses are not disallowable under section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court also favored the assessee in allowing expenditure not hit by section 37(2B) and depreciation on fencing, roads, and culverts at rates applicable to buildings. Additionally, the court allowed development rebate on certain items but disallowed it on telephone equipment. en-us Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 May 2009 18:43:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12769 The High Court ruled against the assessee regarding the claim for investment allowance on compound walls and fencing, disallowing it as buildings cannot be considered as plants for investment allowance purposes. However, the court favored the assessee in allowing guest house expenses as a deduction, holding that such expenses are not disallowable under section 37(4) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court also favored the assessee in allowing expenditure not hit by section 37(2B) and depreciation on fencing, roads, and culverts at rates applicable to buildings. Additionally, the court allowed development rebate on certain items but disallowed it on telephone equipment. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=12769