TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Principal Commissioner was justified in invoking revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 where the assessment order showed no proper examination of the allowability of transfers to general reserve, education reserve and gratuity provision, and whether the directions on merits should be confined to fresh examination by the Assessing Officer.
Analysis: The assessment records showed no specific inquiry or finding on the taxability or deductibility of the impugned reserve transfers and gratuity provision. Mere reproduction of accounting entries in the assessment order did not amount to application of mind on the allowability of those items. In such circumstances, the assessment order was treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The objection that the proceedings were based only on audit material was rejected because the Principal Commissioner was found to have examined the record independently. The plea of change of opinion and past allowance in earlier years was not accepted, as the issue had not been shown to have been examined earlier on the relevant legal footing.
Conclusion: Invocation of section 263 was upheld, and the assessee's claim regarding deduction for the reserve transfers and gratuity provision was left to be examined afresh by the Assessing Officer in accordance with law.
Final Conclusion: The revisional order substantially survived, but the matter on deductibility was remitted for fresh consideration by the Assessing Officer under the revised directions.
Ratio Decidendi: An assessment order is revisable under section 263 where a material claim has not been examined at all, and lack of inquiry amounts to an erroneous order prejudicial to the Revenue.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
