SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(Kar) 436

K.SHIVASHANKAR BHAT, R.RAMAKRISHNA
Commissioner of Income Tax – Appellant
Versus
Mysore Minerals Ltd. – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Mr. Deokinandan, for the Appellant
Mr. K.M.L. Majele, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

K. Shivashankar Bhat, J.—The question referred under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in respect of the assessment year 1982-83 reads thus :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that extraction of granite from a quarry and cutting the same into various sizes and polishing them, was one of manufacture or production of an article or thing, to be entitled to investment allowance under section 32A ?"

2. The principle applicable is governed by the ratio of the decision in Shankar Construction Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1991) 189 ITR 463 KAR In fact, in another case, this court has already considered the applicability of the principle to the case of extraction of granite.

3. Following the aforesaid decision, the question is answered in the affirmative and against the Revenue.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top