9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Eligibility of the assessee-firm as an industrial undertaking. 2. Allowance of investment allowance on the dumpers used in mining activity. Analysis: 1. The appeal by the revenue raised concerns regarding the classification of the assessee-firm as an industrial undertaking and the allowance of investment allowance on dumpers used in mining activity. The ITO contended that the assessee, engaged in mining stones, did not qualify as an industrial undertaking under section 32A for investment allowance due to the absence of manufacturing or production of articles. The AAC, however, relying on the Associated Stone Industries case, deemed the dumpers as plant and considered the assessee as an industrial undertaking eligible for investment allowance. 2. The department argued that mining was not explicitly listed as an activity eligible for investment allowance and being a small-scale industry alone did not warrant the allowance. The assessee, on the other hand, emphasized that the dumpers were solely used in mining activities, as confirmed by the ITO, and referenced the Hukam Singh case to challenge the department's appeal on procedural grounds. 3. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal rejected the assessee's objection on appeal maintainability and delved into the essence of industrial activity. The Tribunal analyzed the definition of mining, production, and manufacture to ascertain the nature of the assessee's operations. It concluded that the extraction of stones from the earth involved manufacturing or production, aligning with the small-scale industry classification. Therefore, the dumpers used in mining activities were deemed eligible for investment allowance under section 32A, and the department's appeal was dismissed. 4. The Tribunal highlighted the significance of the mining process in creating value and bringing forth products, aligning with the definition of production and manufacture. By interpreting mining as an industrial activity involving the creation of articles, the Tribunal upheld the eligibility of the assessee as an industrial undertaking entitled to investment allowance. The decision was based on the understanding that mining operations constituted manufacturing or production activities, justifying the allowance on the dumpers used in such activities. 5. In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, affirming its status as an industrial undertaking and allowing the investment allowance on dumpers used in mining activities. The decision emphasized the industrial nature of mining operations, aligning with the definitions of production and manufacture, ultimately supporting the eligibility of the assessee for investment allowance under section 32A.
|
