Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.17 seconds)

First Leasing Co. Of India Ltd. vs Income-Tax Officer on 30 November, 1982

Therefore, these orders can help the assessee only on one the part of the controversy which we have already decided in favour of the assessee by following the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of First Leasing Co. of India Ltd. (supra). We are, however, of the opinion that the ultimate user of the kolhus and pans by the farmers cannot be described as their user in an industrial undertaking for the purposes of business. We, therefore, hold that the assessee was not entitled to investment allowance in respect of kolhus and pans which the assessee hired out to farmers and by which the farmers only carried out agricultural operation of extracting juice from sugarcane and boiling such juice for its conversion into guran agricultural produce. We, therefore, set aside the order under appeal and restore the Assessing Officer's order. The appeal is allowed.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Madras Cites 23 - Cited by 11 - Full Document

Ajodhya Prasad Tara Chand Khekra vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Lucknow. on 20 January, 1967

Similarly, the judgment of the Delhi Bench in Babu Ram Prakash Narain v. ITO [IT Appeal No. 3509 (Delhi) of 1977-78, dated 18-4-1979], that was in relation to the assessee's claim of additional depreciation under Section 32(1)(iv) does not deal with the user aspect of the plant and machinery and follows the Allahabad High Court judgment in Ajodhya Prasad Tara Chand Khekra v. CIT [ 1967] 66 ITR 576 in which a person who hired out kolhus was held entitled to development rebate on the kolhus intended for hire. In this judgment also, only the hiring aspect of the matter was contested before the Hon'ble High Court and this judgment does not deal with the ultimate user of the plant and machinery for the purposes specified.
Allahabad High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 16 - Full Document
1