1988 (12) TMI 8

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... The first question reads thus: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is a 'manufacturing company' ?" Counsel are agreed that the answer to the first question is governed by the decision of this court in the assessee's own case, CIT v. Shah Construction Co. Ltd. [1983] 142 ITR 696 and that the answer is in the negative and in favour of the Revenue. The first .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... cer disallowed the claim. Before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in appeal, the assessee referred to its business in public health engineering, intake wells for tapping underground water, asphaltic road concrete, high rise structures, low cost housing and dams and canals. It stated that it had purchased the dumpers for its heavy construction jobs for an efficient system of transport. The dump .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... balance-sheet as vehicles. It also noticed that the assessee's case was that the dumpers had been purchased to secure an "efficient system of transport". The Tribunal referred to the use to which the dumpers were put, as explained by the assessee before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, and the manufacturer's brochure which showed that, except for tipping arrangement activated by an oil press .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X