THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. PRAKASH RAO AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN REFERENCE CASE No.10 OF 1996 ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice B. Prakash Rao) Heard Sri S.R. Ashok, Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the revenue and Sri Y. Ratnakar, Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent assessee. The questions, referred by the Tribunal for our opinion, read as under: 1. “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in upholding the order of the CITA who allowed the investment allowance u/s 32A on the Plant & Machinery installed in the Hatchery Division of the assessee company?” 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is justified in holding that the assessee is entitled for deduction u/s. 80JJ(b) of the I.T. Act without applying the restriction contact in the proviso to sec.80JJ treating the assessee’s but of poultry breading also as live stock breeding”? Both the Counsel would agree that the question Nos. 1 and 3 as mentioned above have been answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Venkateswara Hatcheries (P) Ltd[1] and also the decision of the Division bench in The Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. Singh Poultry (P) Ltd[2]. Following said judgments, the said questions are answered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The reference case is disposed of accordingly. ______________________ B. PRAKASH RAO,J ____________________________ 15.06.2010 RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J MRKR [1] 237 ITR 174 [2] R.C. No.213 of 1996, dated 31.01.2006