1985 (11) TMI 96

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... vested Rs. 60,954 for the purchase of laboratory equipment used in practice of his profession. He claimed investment allowance with respect to the said laboratory equipment. It was urged that it is with the aid of the plant and machinery purchased by the assessee for Rs. 60,954 he is able to produce the slides of blood specimens and different cultures such as urine culture, etc. Thus, the assessee .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee satisfies the condition under section 32 of the Act. Hence, investment allowance should be allowed. In this connection he placed reliance on an order of the Tribunal in First ITO v. Dr. P. Vittal Bhat [1983] 6 ITD 560 (Bang.) (SB) and two decisions of the Madras High Court in Dr. P. Vadamalayan v. CIT [1969] 74 ITR 94 and CIT v. Dr. V.K. Ramachandran [1981] 128 ITR 727. The learned depa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ases of X-ray units where X-ray film is exposed and X-ray photograph is produced which is a different and distinct article from the raw film. Thus, there is production of a new article. Those cases have no application to the instant case as the assessee does not manufacture or produces any article or thing. The decision of the Madras High Court in the case of Dr. P. Vadamalayan has also no applica .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X