1. In Income-tax Reference No. 39 of 1958 we had occasion to consider whether motor-cars and bi-cycles were plant 'installed' within the meaning of section 10(2) (vib) of the Income-tax Act so as to make the price paid for them admissible for development rebate, and we were of the view that motor-cars and bi-cycles were plant installed within meaning of clause (vib) of section 10, sub-section (2), of the Act read in the light of the definition given in section 10, sub-section (5). In this reference, the question which falls to be determined is whether the price paid for motor-cars, motor-lorries and office appliances is admissible for development rebate under section 10(2) (vib) of the Income-tax Act.
2. Our judgment in Income-tax Reference No. 39 of 1958 will govern this case in so far as it relates to motor-cars and motor-lorries. It is true in the definition of the expression 'plant' given in section 10(5) of the Act office appliances are not included. But under clause (vib) of sub-section (2) of section 10 development rebate is admissible in respect of machinery or plant provided it satisfies the other requirements of being new and being installed after 31st March, 1954. In the present case, it was conceded before the Tribunal that office appliances are machinery or plant, and the only question which was canvassed before the Tribunal was whether motor-cars, motor-lorries and office appliances being not fixed to the ground the price paid for the same was admissible for development rebate. If office APPLIANCES are machinery or plant within the meaning of section 10(2), clause (vib), of the Act, as conceded before the Tribunal, for reasons which we have given in our judgment in Income-tax Reference No. 39 of 1958 we are of the view that the price paid for the same is admissible for the purpose of development rebate.
3. We, therefore, proceed to answer the question referred for decision in the affirmative. The Income-tax Commissioner to pay the costs of the reference.
4. Question answered in the affirmative.