Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 1990 (11) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

1990 (11) TMI 95 - HC - Income Tax

Issues involved: Interpretation of the term "industrial undertaking" under section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act for investment allowance.

Summary:
The High Court of Karnataka consolidated and disposed of several Income-tax Reference Cases (I.T.R.C.s) involving the allowance of investment under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The cases revolved around whether the assessees, engaged in construction work, qualified as "industrial undertakings" for the purpose of claiming investment allowance.

In the initial cases, the assessing authority disallowed the investment allowance claimed by the assessees engaged in construction work. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal, considering the assessees as "industrial undertakings." The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, following a Special Bench ruling, denied the allowance, stating that construction companies could not be classified as industrial undertakings under section 32A.

In a separate case, the claim of investment allowance by another construction company was initially disallowed but later allowed on appeal. The Tribunal upheld this decision, leading to a common question across all cases regarding the justification of disallowing investment allowance.

The High Court rephrased the question to focus on whether the assessees were entitled to the allowance under section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Act, which pertains to industrial undertakings engaged in construction, manufacture, or production. The court emphasized the need to interpret the term "industrial undertaking" in a manner favorable to the assessee, considering various legal precedents and definitions.

Referring to past judgments and definitions, the court concluded that the activities of the assessees qualified as those of an industrial undertaking, making them eligible for the investment allowance. The court held in favor of the assessees, setting aside the Tribunal's orders in some cases and affirming in others.

In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the assessees, allowing the investment allowance under section 32A(2)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act for the construction companies involved in the cases.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates