Law:

Section:

Section 32A, read with section 32, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Investment allowance - Assessment years 1976-77 and 1977-78 - Assessee-company claimed that building wherein plant and machineries were housed should be treated as a plant and that depreciation and investment allowance be allowed thereon - ITO rejected assessee's claim - On appeal, Commissioner (Appeals) upheld assessee's claim, which was confirmed by Tribunal - Whether since issue had not been considered by Tribunal in light of decision of Apex Court in case of CIT v. Karnataka Power Corpn. [2001]247 ITR 268/[2000] 112 Taxman 629 , matter was to be restored back to Tribunal to give specific finding of fact to the effect that building or part of building in instant case was forming 'integral part of plant and machinery' for purpose of investment allowance and higher depreciation in light of said decision - Held, yes HELD If a particular structure is merely helpful for carrying on the activities of the assessee, it may not be a 'plant', but if it is an integral part of the plant and machinery or portion of that building is an integral part of the plant and machinery, that should be considered in the light of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Karnataka Power Corpn. [2001] 247 ITR 268/[2000] 112 Taxman 629 . [Para 6] Since the issue had not been considered by the Tribunal in the light of said decision, the matter was restored back to the Tribunal with direction to give specific finding of fact to the effect that building or part of the building in the instant case was forming 'integral part of plant and machinery' in the light of the said decision of the Apex Court for the purpose of investment allowance and higher depreciation in the instant case. [Para 7] CASES REFERRED TO CIT v. Anand Theatres [2000] 244 ITR 192/ 110 Taxman 338 (SC) [Para 5], CIT v. R.G. Ispat Ltd. [1994] 210 ITR 1018/[1995] 82 Taxman 488 (Raj.) [Para 6] and CIT v. Karnataka Power Corpn. [2001] 247 ITR 268/[2000] 112 Taxman 629 (SC) [Para 6]. R.B. Mathur for the Appellant. Anant Kasliwal for the Respondent. ORDER 1. On an application under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal has referred the…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492