TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1989 (12) TMI 77
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 32A of the I.T. Act to the assessee. It is contended on behalf of the Department that the findings of the CIT(A) are not correct. It is an admitted fact that the assessee is engaged in construction activity. Inviting our attention to the decision of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Oricon (P.) Ltd. [1989] 176 ITR 407 in claim of investment allowance upheld in the case of the assessee engaged in co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... company, but there is no way to deny the claim of investment allowance. This is because the provisions governing the grant of investment allowance as contained in section 32A of the I.T. Act cannot be regarded as in pari materia with the definition of industrial company as available in the annual Finance Act. Investment allowance is available to an assessee in regard to the cost of assets used in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... industrial company and therefore was entitled to concessional rate of tax. The Court, on a perusal of the definition, came to a conclusion that the definition of the industrial company, made a distinction between the activities of construction and of manufacture or processing. Further, the definition covered only a construction company which was engaged in the construction of ships and by necessa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ywhere in the statute. But as per the accepted meaning given to that expression or as understood in common parlance, it would mean a venture or an enterprise carrying on some activities which had some relation to some industrial activity. In this accepted sense, the assessee was an industrial undertaking and since it was engaged in construction, the same would be entitled to investment allowance. ....