9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Interpretation of Section 32A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 regarding investment allowance for a hotel business. Analysis: The case involved a hotel company claiming investment allowance for machinery used in its business during the assessment year 1981-82. The company completed construction and commenced operations for only 14 days in that year. The claim for investment allowance was rejected by the assessing officer, CIT(A), and the Tribunal on the grounds that the machinery did not meet the conditions specified in Section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Act. The key requirement under Section 32A(2)(b)(iii) is that the machinery or plant must be new and installed after March 31, 1976, in an industrial undertaking for manufacturing or production purposes. The company failed to establish that it was an industrial undertaking engaged in the manufacture or production of any article or thing. The lack of evidence supporting the claim led to the rejection by the authorities. The company relied on various decisions, including those from different High Courts and the Supreme Court, to argue that the preparation of food in a hotel could be considered as manufacturing. However, the courts consistently held that a hotel business does not qualify as an industrial undertaking for claiming investment allowance under Section 32A. The courts emphasized that the primary business of a hotel is providing services, and activities like food preparation are ancillary to the main business. The machinery used in a hotel kitchen, including equipment for cooking, grinding, or heating, does not qualify as machinery used in the manufacture or production of goods. The purpose of such machinery is for immediate consumption and not for producing durable goods. The distinction between a service industry, such as a hotel, and a manufacturing industry was crucial in determining the eligibility for investment allowance. The courts clarified that the term "industrial undertaking" in Section 32A refers to entities engaged in manufacturing goods, articles, or things, and not service providers like hotels. The facilities provided by a hotel are meant for immediate use by customers on the premises, and the machinery installed serves the comfort of guests rather than producing tangible goods. Ultimately, the courts ruled against the assessee, stating that a hotel business does not qualify as an industrial undertaking for claiming investment allowance under Section 32A. The decision was in favor of the Revenue, emphasizing the non-eligibility of hotels for investment allowance based on the nature of their operations as service providers rather than manufacturers.
|
