TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 43X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the aforesaid decisions Tribunal was legally correct in granting investment allowance to the assessee - - - - - Dated:- 30-9-2005 - Judge(s) : R. K. AGRAWAL., PRAKASH KRISHNA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by Prakash Krishna J.-The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), for opinion to this court: "Whether, on facts and circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in granting investment allowance to the assessee?" The dispute relates to the assessment year 1984-85. The assessee, who is an individual, carries on proprietary business in the name of M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. In CIT v. Dr. V.K. Ramachandran [1981] 128 ITR 727, the Madras High Court has held that allowability of development rebate on X-ray machine is a debatable point and cannot be the subject matter of rectification proceedings under section 154 of the Income-tax Act. In CIT v. Trinity Hospital [1997] 225 ITR 178 (Raj), it has been held that for rendering efficient medical services to patients investment allowance is allowable on various machines installed by the hospital including (i) X-ray, (ii) ultra sound scanner/ultra sonographic machine, (iii) foetal monitor, and (iv) air-conditioning equipment to ensure proper working of these machines. It has been held that the machines and equipment can legally be called machinery or plant installed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a sound, medical electronic equipment. To arrive at the aforesaid conclusion the Gauhati High Court has placed reliance upon the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Trinity Hospital [1997] 225 ITR 178, Dr. V.K. Ramachandran [1981] 128 ITR 727 of the Madras High Court. In CIT v. Air Survey Co. of India P. Ltd. [1998] 232 ITR 707 (Cal), the assessee was an air survey company engaged in the business of survey, mapping, aerial photography and aero-magnetic photography. Its claim for investment allowance under section 32A of the Act in respect of aircraft radio purchase was held to be admissible as the use of aircraft radio. The aforesaid business would fall within the purview of the expression "manufacture" and "production" and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... less and the assessee may get chicks more in number, this however, would not mean when the assessee produced the chicks and the chicks are "articles or things". This case has no application to the controversy involved in the present case, inasmuch as the ultra sound machine equipment, etc., do produce photographs. The Supreme Court in the case of Associated Cement Companies Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs [2001] 124 STC 59; [2001] 2 JT 141 (SC) has held in a case under the Customs Act that drawing plans, manuals, computer discs and cassettes containing information technology or ideas for construction of hotels and resorts are goods and exigible to duty. Thus in view of the aforesaid discussion it is not possible to say that the pictures ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
