2002 (7) TMI 36

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the drilling machines used by the assessee should be treated as earth-moving machinery, falling under entry (4) of item No. III-D of Part I of Appendix I to the Income-tax Rules, 1962, and, therefore, entitled to depreciation at 30 per cent.?" Admit. On the request of learned counsel for the parties, we have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he basis of material available on the record the Assessing Officer arrived at the conclusion that the work done with the rig by the assessee during 11 years could not be categorised as heavy construction, accordingly, in his opinion, the assessee could not claim depreciation at 30 per cent. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that the drilling operations had resulted in the production o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... learned counsel for the Revenue that the Tribunal has committed an error in allowing depreciation on rig machine at 30 per cent. for the reason that machinery is involved in the heavy construction. It is submitted that the basic condition for allowing the claim of investment allowance is manufacturing, production or construction of article or thing. It is further submitted that the assessee is a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X