https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464442 HC dismissed the departmental appeals as falling below the CBDT monetary threshold and not qualifying for the prosecution exception. The Tribunal had allowed investment allowance claims (including for hired plant and dumpers) and rejected an industry report, but the HC did not adjudicate those substantive merits. The Court found the prosecution relied on by the Department was not demonstrably active (adjourned sine die), respondents could not be served after long delay, and continuation would be academic. Liberty granted to the Department to apply for revival within six months if circumstances change. en-us Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 20:27:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464442 HC dismissed the departmental appeals as falling below the CBDT monetary threshold and not qualifying for the prosecution exception. The Tribunal had allowed investment allowance claims (including for hired plant and dumpers) and rejected an industry report, but the HC did not adjudicate those substantive merits. The Court found the prosecution relied on by the Department was not demonstrably active (adjourned sine die), respondents could not be served after long delay, and continuation would be academic. Liberty granted to the Department to apply for revival within six months if circumstances change. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=464442