https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28827 Questions on whether the assessee was the real owner of a flat and whether income accrued from it were treated as covered by an earlier decision and answered in the assessee's favour. On the rebate issue, the Bombay High Court held that the assessee's dominant business was construction of dams, bridges, buildings and similar works, carried on with machinery, and that any mixing of materials or conversion of boulders into stones was only incidental. The company was therefore not wholly or mainly engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods, and the claim for super-tax rebate failed. en-us Wed, 21 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Feb 2010 11:52:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28827 Questions on whether the assessee was the real owner of a flat and whether income accrued from it were treated as covered by an earlier decision and answered in the assessee's favour. On the rebate issue, the Bombay High Court held that the assessee's dominant business was construction of dams, bridges, buildings and similar works, carried on with machinery, and that any mixing of materials or conversion of boulders into stones was only incidental. The company was therefore not wholly or mainly engaged in the manufacture or processing of goods, and the claim for super-tax rebate failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 21 Apr 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=28827