<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (4) TMI 5 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18591</link>
    <description>A computer installed in a special cabin within factory premises and used for processing raw materials, production data, wage and salary calculations, and monitoring operations was treated as part of the manufacturing apparatus. Applying the functional test, the court held that the equipment was in direct connection with the manufacturing process of the cable division, and rejected the narrower view that computers qualify only when used for accounting purposes. The earlier accounting-only precedent was distinguished. On that basis, the computer was regarded as plant for the Act&#039;s purposes, and the assessee was entitled to investment allowance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:23:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=57591" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (4) TMI 5 - CALCUTTA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18591</link>
      <description>A computer installed in a special cabin within factory premises and used for processing raw materials, production data, wage and salary calculations, and monitoring operations was treated as part of the manufacturing apparatus. Applying the functional test, the court held that the equipment was in direct connection with the manufacturing process of the cable division, and rejected the narrower view that computers qualify only when used for accounting purposes. The earlier accounting-only precedent was distinguished. On that basis, the computer was regarded as plant for the Act&#039;s purposes, and the assessee was entitled to investment allowance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Apr 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18591</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>