Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2006 (2) TMI 119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... - 16-2-2006 - Judge(s) : P. D. DINAKARAN., P. P. S. JANARTHANA RAJA. JUDGMENT The judgment of the court was delivered by P.D. Dinakaran J.- The appeal is directed against the order dated June 27, 2005, made in I.T.A. No. 348/Mds/2001 allowing deduction under section 80-I of the Income-tax Act, 1961, holding that the photo processing machine installed by the assessee was used for the process of manufacturing and production of article or thing, entitling the assessee for deduction. The brief facts of the case are stated as under. The assessee derives income from photo studio by exposing the negatives and printing of positives/photos. The Assessing Officer rejected the assessee's claim for deduction under section 80-I of the Act. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the same had been developed and had also become a totally different commercial commodity having its own identity/character and a product of end use. Therefore, what is involved while taking a photograph by a photographer is a manufacture. Hence, the assesses, having engaged themselves in manufacturing process, is entitled to claim investment allowance. This court in CIT v. Prasad Productions P. Ltd. [2001] 249 ITR 502, has already held as follows (headnote): "The assessee's business consisted of producing feature films. It had a processing and drying plant, where exposed films in various stages were processed into positive films used for projection in cinema theatres. The assessee was entitled to investment allowance in respect of its p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e assessee from claiming the allowance." The Rajasthan High Court in CIT v. Laxmi Art Studio [2001] 249 ITR 710 has held that: "It is not the requirement that in order to fulfil the conditions of section 32A, the plant and machinery should have been installed in an industrial undertaking for the purpose of manufacture or production of any article or thing and must be related to the production of such article or thing which is saleable in the open market only. Any plant and machinery specified in section 32A manufacturing or producing any article or thing not in the prohibitory list in the Eleventh Schedule is a plant and machinery through which the article or thing is produced notwithstanding that such production of article or thing onl .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates