2004 (6) TMI 24

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of article. Since the factual basis for grant of investment allowance is absent, we return the reference without answering - - - - - Dated:- 16-6-2004 - Judge(s) : N. V. BALASUBRAMANIAN., M. THANIKACHALAM. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by N.V. Balasubramanian J.- The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following common question of law to this court for the assessment years 1986-87 and 1987-88. "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that assessee is entitled to investment allowance on the activities of the assessee, viz., mining granite from quarries and exporting them after cutting, polishing, etc., which tantamount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... gly, the above question of law was framed and the same has been referred to us by the Tribunal. Learned counsel appearing for the Revenue has brought to the decision of this court in CIT v. Bishal Enterprises [2001] 247 ITR 484 wherein this court considered the question of claim of investment allowance and held that preparation of granite blocks does not amount to manufacture or production of articles within the meaning of section 32A of the Act and the assessee would not be entitled to claim investment allowance under section 32A of the Act. Learned counsel for the Revenue also brought to the notice of this court the decision of this court in CIT v. Vijay Granites P. Ltd. [2004] 267 ITR 606 wherein this court has held that cutting and po .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... amount to manufacture or production of article and the assessee would not be entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act. The case of the assessee was that it has converted the granite into a marketable commodity but the case of the assessee was not gone into and the nature of the activities of the assessee was not ascertained. We find from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax that the assessee has raised a specific point that the assessee, after extracting granite, has converted the same into a marketable commodity. The Commissioner of Income-tax in the revisional order has not gone into the nature of the activities of the assessee. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has, merely following the assessee's o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X