Judgment :- THANIKKACHALAM J. At the instance of the Department, the Tribunal referred the following question for the opinion of this court, under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the assessee is entitled to investment allowance prescribed under section 32A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 1978-79 ?" The point for consideration is, whether the assessee, which is engaged in the business of executing civil contract works is entitled to investment allowance under section 32A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 1993 AIR(SC) 2529, 1994 (S1) SCC 280, 1993 (5) JT 346 , 1993 (3) SCALE 726 , 1993 (204) ITR 412, 1993 (91) STC 450, 1993 (3) Scale 726 , 1993 (114) CTR 420, 1993 (70) TAXMANN 312, 1993 (2) TLR 1117, 114 CTR(SC) 420, 1993 AIR(SCW) 3317, 1993 TaxLR 1117 wherein the Supreme Court held that when the assessee engaged in construction work, the assessee is not doing any manufacture or processing, and, therefore, is not entitled to investment allowance under section 32A. Therefore, in view of the said decision of the Supreme Court, we have to hold that the Tribunal was not correct in granting investment allowance under section 32A(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in favour of the assessee in the present case. Accordingly, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and in favour of the Department. No costs. However, now the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the appeal on the question of jurisdiction exercised by the Commissioner of Income-tax under section 263 of the Act, on merits, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.