C I T, PATIALA vs. THE ROADMASTER INDUSTRIES INDIA, RAJPURA

PDF · subscribers

ITR/78/1997HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01035454199722 November 2006Bench: MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL,MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL1 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh held that the ITAT was right in law in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) in allowing deduction under Section 32-AB on machinery assembled by the assessee. The Court's decision was based on its prior ruling in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala Vs. M/S Hindustan Wire Product Ltd., Patiala, Rohtak, ITR No. 118 of 1996, decided on 20.09.2006. In that precedent, a similar question of law was answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. Therefore, following its own established legal position, the Court answered the referred question against the Revenue and in favour of the Assessee. The reference was disposed of accordingly, with no specific operative directions other than answering the question.

What were the facts?

The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala (Revenue) has filed an Income Tax Reference (ITR) No. 78 of 1997 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The reference arises from an order dated 18.11.1996 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Chandigarh Bench, in I.T.A. No. 430/Chandi/91. The assessment year in dispute is 1989-90. The core of the dispute pertains to the deduction allowed under Section 32-AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on machinery assembled by the assessee, M/S Roadmaster Industries of India Ltd., Rajpura (Assessee). The ITAT had upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] in allowing this deduction.

What were the issues?

1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) in allowing deduction u/s 32-AB on machinery assembled by the assessee? The Revenue's contention, implied by the reference of the question of law, is that the deduction under Section 32-AB should not have been allowed on machinery assembled by the assessee. The specific arguments of the Revenue are not detailed in the judgment. The Assessee's contention, as upheld by the ITAT and CIT(A), is that the deduction under Section 32-AB is permissible on machinery assembled by the assessee. The specific arguments of the Assessee are not detailed in the judgment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 32-AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.R No.78

of 1997

Date of decision:22.11.2006 The Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala ...Petitioner Versus M/S Roadmaster Industries of India Ltd., Rajpura

...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr.Sanjay Bansal, Advocate for the revenue. **** JUDGMENT Following question of law has been referred for opinion of this Court by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench Chandigarh arising out of its order dated 18.11.1996 passed in I.T.A.No.430/Chandi/91, in respect of the assessment year 1989-90. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) in allowing deduction u/s 32-AB on machinery assembled by the assessee? The above question has already been gone into by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Patiala Vs.M/S Hindustan Wire Product Ltd., Patiala , Rohtak, ITR No.118 of 1996, decided on 20.9.2006 wherein question has been answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. In view of the above, the question referred is answered against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee. The reference is disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge November 22,2006 (Rajesh Bindal) Pka Judge

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →