https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38191 The court ruled in favor of the revenue, denying the rebate claim for the assessee based on the interpretation of item 13 of the Fifth Schedule under section 80E of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that the use of "namely" restricted the application to the enumerated items, excluding bonemeal, which the assessee manufactured. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to the claimed rebate, and the revenue was awarded costs, with the counsel's fee set at Rs. 250. en-us Tue, 16 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Apr 2010 16:21:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38191 The court ruled in favor of the revenue, denying the rebate claim for the assessee based on the interpretation of item 13 of the Fifth Schedule under section 80E of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The court held that the use of "namely" restricted the application to the enumerated items, excluding bonemeal, which the assessee manufactured. Consequently, the assessee was not entitled to the claimed rebate, and the revenue was awarded costs, with the counsel's fee set at Rs. 250. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Dec 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38191