<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1965 (9) TMI 52 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170844</link>
    <description>Printing balance-sheets, profit and loss accounts, dividend warrants, pamphlets and share certificates was treated as manufacture in the ordinary commercial sense because the process produced a distinct finished article with its own commercial identity and use. The court held that, for Explanation 2 to section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the absence of a statutory definition required the word &quot;manufacture&quot; to be read in its common trade meaning, and the object of the provision supported inclusion of such printing activity. The business was therefore wholly manufacture, and the statutory percentage under clause (ii) of Explanation 2 applied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2015 12:47:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388071" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1965 (9) TMI 52 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170844</link>
      <description>Printing balance-sheets, profit and loss accounts, dividend warrants, pamphlets and share certificates was treated as manufacture in the ordinary commercial sense because the process produced a distinct finished article with its own commercial identity and use. The court held that, for Explanation 2 to section 23A of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the absence of a statutory definition required the word &quot;manufacture&quot; to be read in its common trade meaning, and the object of the provision supported inclusion of such printing activity. The business was therefore wholly manufacture, and the statutory percentage under clause (ii) of Explanation 2 applied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 1965 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170844</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>