Research › Browse › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

1998 DIGILAW 1644 (MAD)

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Bishal Enterprises

1998-12-01

A.SUBBULAKSHMY, R.JAYASIMHA BABU

body1998
Judgment :- MRS. A. SUBBULAKSHMY, J. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to us for consideration : "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the activities carried out for the preparation of granite blocks amounted to manufacture of an article within the meaning of section 32A and the assessee is entitled for investment allowance under section 32A ?" The year of assessment involved is 1984-85. The assessee is a registered firm. It was engaged in the business of mining granite blocks and exporting the same. The assessee claimed investment allowance which was negatived by the Income-tax Officer. On appeal the Commissioner of Income-tax allowed the assessee's claim and the Tribunal also confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax. On that this reference has arisen. A similar question was considered by this court in Tax Cases Nos. 810 and 811 of 1989 and this court by its order dated October 27, 1998 (CIT v. Gomatesh Granites, has answered this question against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. Following the above decision and for the reasons stated therein, we answer the question referred to us, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.