https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38740 Cellulose film was construed broadly, in its commercial and contextual setting, as falling within item 24(4) of the First Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, so the company remained entitled to a tax credit certificate under section 280ZB. The HC also held that withdrawal under rule 8(1) of the Tax Credit Certificates (Corporation Tax) Scheme, 1966 could not stand because the alleged mistake was not an error apparent on the record; a debatable question of law is outside rectificatory power. The withdrawal was therefore invalid and the original tax credit entitlement was restored. en-us Tue, 05 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Apr 2010 16:58:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38740 Cellulose film was construed broadly, in its commercial and contextual setting, as falling within item 24(4) of the First Schedule to the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, so the company remained entitled to a tax credit certificate under section 280ZB. The HC also held that withdrawal under rule 8(1) of the Tax Credit Certificates (Corporation Tax) Scheme, 1966 could not stand because the alleged mistake was not an error apparent on the record; a debatable question of law is outside rectificatory power. The withdrawal was therefore invalid and the original tax credit entitlement was restored. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Apr 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=38740