https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18213 Mastication of rubber was treated as a legal question requiring reconsideration on whether it amounts to manufacture or production of a commercially different and distinct commodity under the Income-tax Act. The court noted that earlier income-tax orders had accepted the claim, but an excise-law view describing the process as yielding only a semi-processed, non-marketable material could not automatically govern the income-tax issue without fresh legal scrutiny. On that basis, entitlement to investment allowance and deduction under section 80-I was also to be reconsidered as dependent on the manufacture or production test, and both questions were referred under section 256(2) for a statement of case. en-us Fri, 01 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2009 15:18:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18213 Mastication of rubber was treated as a legal question requiring reconsideration on whether it amounts to manufacture or production of a commercially different and distinct commodity under the Income-tax Act. The court noted that earlier income-tax orders had accepted the claim, but an excise-law view describing the process as yielding only a semi-processed, non-marketable material could not automatically govern the income-tax issue without fresh legal scrutiny. On that basis, entitlement to investment allowance and deduction under section 80-I was also to be reconsidered as dependent on the manufacture or production test, and both questions were referred under section 256(2) for a statement of case. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=18213