Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.41 seconds)
Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Lucknow vs M/S U.P.Cooperative Sugar Factories ... on 9 August, 2012
cites
Section 1 in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 32A in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
Section 80I in The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
Cit vs Radico Khaitan Ltd. on 14 September, 2004
The judgment of Allahabad High Court in the Commissioner of Income Tax and Anr. v. Radico Khaitan Ltd. [2005] 274 ITR 354 would not be of any assistance to the revenue. No doubt, the facts of that case suggest that the assessee was engaged in manufacturing of industrial alcohol, IMFL, country liquor, fertilizers etc. and the High Court held that the investment allowance was not admissible in respect of the plant and machinery installed for the purpose of manufacture of any of the items mentioned in 11th Schedule. However, at the same time, it suggests that it was limited to the distillery unit which was dealing with the manufacturing of IMFL and country liquor only. The question with which we are concerned in the present case did not arise for consideration and, therefore, was not addressed at all namely; if the same machinery is used both for the purpose of manufacturing of industrial alcohol as well as for manufacture of IMFL and country liquor etc., whether on such plant or machinery, the investment allowance would be admissible. When such a situation arises, Sub-section (2A) of Section 32A of the Act would be the governing provision.