https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27311 The High Court held that the operations carried out by the assessee, which involved processing existing materials without creating a new end-product, did not qualify as "manufacture of textiles" for claiming higher development rebate under section 33(1)(b)(B)(i). The Court emphasized that to be eligible for the rebate, the operations must lead to the creation of new textiles as specified in the Fifth Schedule. Since the processes undertaken did not result in a distinct commodity from the original material, the Court ruled against the assessee, favoring the Revenue, and no costs were awarded. en-us Wed, 04 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Feb 2010 10:54:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27311 The High Court held that the operations carried out by the assessee, which involved processing existing materials without creating a new end-product, did not qualify as "manufacture of textiles" for claiming higher development rebate under section 33(1)(b)(B)(i). The Court emphasized that to be eligible for the rebate, the operations must lead to the creation of new textiles as specified in the Fifth Schedule. Since the processes undertaken did not result in a distinct commodity from the original material, the Court ruled against the assessee, favoring the Revenue, and no costs were awarded. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 04 Jan 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=27311