https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13903 Investment allowance under section 32A was denied for plant and machinery used in fish processing because the issue had already been covered by binding precedent on the scope of allowance for processing activities. The High Court confined the question to the assessee's fish-processing operations and held that the Tribunal's view in favour of the assessee could not stand in light of the earlier Supreme Court ruling. The operative effect was that the assessee was not entitled to the allowance, and the matter was decided in favour of the Revenue. en-us Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jul 2009 18:20:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13903 Investment allowance under section 32A was denied for plant and machinery used in fish processing because the issue had already been covered by binding precedent on the scope of allowance for processing activities. The High Court confined the question to the assessee's fish-processing operations and held that the Tribunal's view in favour of the assessee could not stand in light of the earlier Supreme Court ruling. The operative effect was that the assessee was not entitled to the allowance, and the matter was decided in favour of the Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 11 Oct 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=13903