https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17208 The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue in a case concerning the eligibility of construction of an industrial undertaking for investment allowance under section 32A(2)(b)(iii). The court determined that the business of construction did not qualify as an industrial undertaking for investment allowance based on legal precedents and the facts of the case. Additionally, the court held that dumpers used in civil engineering contract work did not meet the criteria of 'road transport vehicles' for investment allowance. Furthermore, the court decided that service charges accrued to the assessee should be included in its income for taxation purposes, supporting the Revenue's position. en-us Thu, 31 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Sep 2009 18:21:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17208 The High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue in a case concerning the eligibility of construction of an industrial undertaking for investment allowance under section 32A(2)(b)(iii). The court determined that the business of construction did not qualify as an industrial undertaking for investment allowance based on legal precedents and the facts of the case. Additionally, the court held that dumpers used in civil engineering contract work did not meet the criteria of 'road transport vehicles' for investment allowance. Furthermore, the court decided that service charges accrued to the assessee should be included in its income for taxation purposes, supporting the Revenue's position. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 31 Jul 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17208