COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX V. DR.SHAILESH C. PATEL

ITR/12/1997

AI Insights

The case revolves around the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench 'C' referring a question to the High Court regarding the eligibility of Dr. Shaileash C. Patel, a pathologist running a pathological laboratory, for an investment allowance under Section 32A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal had initially granted the allowance, which was contested by the Revenue. The primary legal question was whether the assessee's pathological laboratory could be classified as an 'industrial undertaking' producing an article or thing, thus qualifying for the investment allowance. The High Court, referencing a previous similar case, upheld the Tribunal's decision in favor of the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2006] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 717867 (HC-GUJARAT)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 30-08-2006
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Suresh Amin Family Trust
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B D KARIA
• Assessee Lawyers: MANISH BHATT
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Industrial Undertaking; Investment allowance; Machinery; Pathological Laboratory
• Section: 32A

Judgement Text

"ITR/12/1997 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD INCOME TAX REFERENCE No. 12 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - Applicant(s) Versus DR.SHAILESH C. PATEL - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MANISH R BHATT for Applicant(s) : 1, SERVED BY RPAD - (N) for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 30/08/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG) ITR/12/1997 2/3 JUDGMENT . , Mrs Mona Bhatt learned counsel for the Revenue . . . . , . applicant Mr B D Karia learned counsel for the assessee . 2 , The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench , , 'C' has referred the following question at the instance of the , . . . & Revenue for opinion of this Court in I T Appeal No 3445 / / - - ; 3446 Ahd 1991 relating to Assessment Year 1986 87 and 1987 88 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is right in law in holding that the assessee engaged in a profession of pathological laboratory could be said to be said to be carrying on a business as an industrial undertaking which produced an article or thing and was thus entitled to investment / . - allowance u s 32 A of the Act on the new machinery installed in his clinic ?' . 3 , Undisputedly the assessee is a Pathologist and runs his Pathological Laboratory in Baroda under the name of Alakh . . , , /- Laboratory He had purchased machinery worth Rs 2 88 696 . , /-. and claimed investment allowance of Rs 98 498 The claim was disallowed by the Assessing Officer but however in a final appeal before the Tribunal the investment allowance was . granted in favour of the assessee . 4 . , In Income Tax Reference No 237 of 1995 answering , an identical question we have held that if plant and machinery , are purchased for use in a Pathological Laboratory then the ITR/12/1997 3/3 JUDGMENT . assessee would be entitled to investment allowance In view of . . . the said Judgment dated 1 8 2006 in Income Tax Reference No . 237 of 1995 between Commissioner of Income Tax Vs Suresh , Amin Family Trust we decide the Reference against the interests . . of the Revenue The matter stands disposed of [ . . , . ] R S Garg J . rmr [ . . , . ] M R Shah J "