<?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>1991 (1) TMI 42 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22242</link>
    <description>The court held that the internal telephone system in the factory qualified as &#039;plant&#039; for the purpose of investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The court considered precedents from other High Courts and emphasized the system&#039;s essential function in the business process and production efficiency. Rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument, the court interpreted &#039;plant&#039; broadly to include items facilitating business operations. Consequently, the assessee was granted the investment allowance, with the court ruling in favor of the assessee and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contention.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=61241" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (1) TMI 42 - KARNATAKA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22242</link>
      <description>The court held that the internal telephone system in the factory qualified as &#039;plant&#039; for the purpose of investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The court considered precedents from other High Courts and emphasized the system&#039;s essential function in the business process and production efficiency. Rejecting the Revenue&#039;s argument, the court interpreted &#039;plant&#039; broadly to include items facilitating business operations. Consequently, the assessee was granted the investment allowance, with the court ruling in favor of the assessee and rejecting the Revenue&#039;s contention.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>