Law:

Section:

[2007] 291 ITR 72 (PUNJ. & HAR.) HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Mrs. P. Kropivnik v. Commissioner of Income-tax M. M. KUMAR AND RAJESH BINDAL, JJ. ITR NO. 117 OF 1987 JANUARY 15, 2007 Section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Investment allowance â–  Ropeways The Assessing Officer held that construction, manufacture or production of ropeways was not the business of the assessee but it was only a means for transporting the timber etc. of a third party from one place to another and consequently the assessee was not entitled to investment allowance under section 32A in respect of machinery employed for setting up ropeways. Held that the assessee had sought to claim the benefit under section 32A on the investment made on the value of plant and machinery installed for transport purposes and not for the purpose of manufacture or production of any article or thing. There was no material on record to even remotely suggest that the machinery was installed by the assessee for production of any article or thing or to enable the assessee to assemble any machinery. Once it was found that the assessee did not satisfy the conditions for grant of investment allowance as laid down under section 32A there was no reason to hold that the assessee was entitled to the same. [Assessment year 1980-81] JUDGMENT Rajesh Bindal, J.-The following questions of law have been referred to this court for opinion by the Income-tax Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short "the Tribunal") arising out of ITA Nos. 555/ Chandi/84 relating to the assessment year 1980-81 : "1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that construction, manufacture or production of ropeways was not the business of the assessee but it was only a means for transporting the timber etc. of a third party from one place to another and consequentially not entitled to investment allowance under section 32A of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that ropeways were road transport vehicles as contemplated by proviso (b) to section 32A(1) and, therefore, not…

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