1997 (12) TMI 74

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nce ?" The assessee an individual, takes contracts for construction of buildings for different parties. During the assessment proceeding, for the assessment year 1980-81, the assessee claimed investment allowance on 14 different items which are listed as under: 1. Centering sheet. 2. Red cutting machine, R. M. Brand hand lever shearing machine with handle. 3. Ramming machine. 4. Ramming machine. 5. Ramming machine. 6. Double folding prestke. 7. Vibrator. 8. Concrete mixer. 9. Acrow from fitting. 10. Acrow from fitting. 11. Swivel coupler (scaffolding unit). 12. Acrow scaffolding unit. 13. Acrow scaffolding unit. 14. Levelling instrument. The aggregate value of all the items came to Rs. 1,23,01....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the submissions of learned counsel for both sides. The Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. N. C. Budharaja and Co. [1993] 204 ITR 412, clearly held that the assessee constructing buildings is not entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Act as the said provision did not comprehend within its ambit construction of a dam, a bridge, a building, a road, a canal and other similar constructions. Admittedly, the assessee is a contractor engaged in the construction of the building. On the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in N. C. Budharaja's case [1993] 204 ITR 412, the assessee is not entitled to claim investment allowance. The above decision of the Supreme Court in N. C. Budharaja's case [1993] 204 ITR 412 was co....