1981 (4) TMI 93

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lations inside the factory did not come under the head " Hydraulic works, pipelines and sluices " as described under item III(ii)A(1) of Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules, 1962, and that the assessee was entitled to extra shift depreciation allowance thereon as claimed by it ? " Assessee is a public limited company deriving income from manufacture and sale of steel castings, grinding media, steel ingot castings and G.I. pipes. The relevant assessment year is 1974-75 with the year ending with 30th of September, 1973, as the previous year. Assessee claimed before the ITO extra shift depreciation allowance on sanitary and water supply installations of the Ghaziabad unit of the assessee's works. The ITO disallowed the claim on the ground th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... laying down the rates of depreciation for the different types of machineries and plant, we are of opinion that the assessee is entitled to succeed in this appeal. ' Hydraulic works, pipelines and sluices' are items which are not defined under the Act or under the Rules. Their meanings have, therefore, to be gathered from the context in which they are used as well as in accordance with their meaning in common parlance. Before the Income-tax Rules, 1962, came into force, the Indian Income-tax Rules, 1922, were in force. Item-E of the Appendix to those Rules contained the following two items: ' E. Electric supply and undertakings (i) Electric plant, machinery, boilers, (ii) Hydro-electric concerns-hydraulic works, pipelines and sluices ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reat extent the finding of the Tribunal is indeed one of fact, namely, the assessee's factory does not come under the head"Hydraulic works, .pipelines and sluices We are impressed by the Tribunal's analysis that the heading is really hydraulic works, pipelines and sluices " or machineries connected therewith. Admittedly, the Ghaziabad unit of the assessee's factory is not concerned with that type of work and the assessee's claim, therefore, is not covered by the entry in Appendix I. Therefore, the Tribunal was right in its conclusion that the assessee's claim was admissible and the restriction in the Appendix did not preclude the benefit from being extended to the assessee. No material has been placed by learned standing counsel to persuade....