Commissioner of Income Tax vs Best and Crompton Engineering Ltd.

R. Jayasimha Babu, J.—The Tribunal has held that the assessee is > mainly engaged in the business of construction, manufacture or production of high tension transmission lines which are articles not specified in the Eleventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act, 1961, and was, therefore, entitled to investment allowance u/s 32A of the Act, in the sum of Rs. 23,271 for the assessment year 1978-79. The Tribunal in so holding affirmed the view of the Commissioner who, in appeal, had set aside the finding to the contrary that had been recorded by the Assessing Officer.

The only argument advanced before us is that the assessee being also engaged in the business of contracting for the erection of those articles it is not entitled to the allowance. This argument is wholly untenable. Once it is found that the requirements of Section 32A are satisfied the benefit thereunder cannot be denied.

We answer the reference in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. As the assessee has not appeared, instead of awarding costs to the assessee, we direct that the Revenue pay a sum of Rs. 1,500 to the State Legal Aid Fund.