Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Revision jurisdiction was contested where revenue sought to revise an assessment by treating purchases as bogus. Tribunal found the assessing officer had issued statutory notices, conducted inquiries including notices to suppliers, and taken a plausible view after considering submissions; therefore the revisional officer could not substitute that view under the power to correct orders deemed "prejudicial to the interests of the revenue." Clauses in Explanation 2 relied on by the revisional officer were held unsupported by facts or law, the revisional order was set aside, and the appeal decided against the revenue.
Revision jurisdiction was contested where revenue sought to revise an assessment by treating purchases as bogus. Tribunal found the assessing officer had issued statutory notices, conducted inquiries including notices to suppliers, and taken a plausible view after considering submissions; therefore the revisional officer could not substitute that view under the power to correct orders deemed "prejudicial to the interests of the revenue." Clauses in Explanation 2 relied on by the revisional officer were held unsupported by facts or law, the revisional order was set aside, and the appeal decided against the revenue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.