<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Manufacture qualification under Section 80IC upheld for unit converting electrical steel into laminations, deduction allowed.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97202</link>
    <description>Dispute concerned entitlement to deduction under Section 80IC for an Uttarakhand unit: tribunal held the unit&#039;s conversion of electrical steel into graded laminations and assembly of an integrated cooling module amounted to &#039;manufacture&#039; because a commercially distinct commodity with distinct end-use emerged, applying the distinct-commodity test. Prior precedents on transformation and design supported manufacture. The tribunal found no evidence that the unit was formed by splitting-up or reconstruction of existing business and inter-unit transfers were at arm&#039;s length; consequently the unit met the conditions of Section 80IC(2)(a) and was not barred by Section 80IC(4)(i), and the assessing officer&#039;s disallowance was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:35:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:35:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=887996" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Manufacture qualification under Section 80IC upheld for unit converting electrical steel into laminations, deduction allowed.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97202</link>
      <description>Dispute concerned entitlement to deduction under Section 80IC for an Uttarakhand unit: tribunal held the unit&#039;s conversion of electrical steel into graded laminations and assembly of an integrated cooling module amounted to &#039;manufacture&#039; because a commercially distinct commodity with distinct end-use emerged, applying the distinct-commodity test. Prior precedents on transformation and design supported manufacture. The tribunal found no evidence that the unit was formed by splitting-up or reconstruction of existing business and inter-unit transfers were at arm&#039;s length; consequently the unit met the conditions of Section 80IC(2)(a) and was not barred by Section 80IC(4)(i), and the assessing officer&#039;s disallowance was deleted.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2026 07:35:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=97202</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>