Proportionate interest, unexplained credits and partner remuneration disputed; proofs of fund nexus and lender identity were decisive and disallowance...
Capital gains valuation from stamp assessment versus net consideration for residential reinvestment: deemed stamp value replaced for gains but not for...
Revisional powers under Section 264 were held to be broad and aimed at preventing miscarriage of justice and granting relief to an assessee even where the assessee committed mistakes in the original return; consequently the revision application should have been considered and the impugned order under Section 264 was set aside. The court distinguished the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd., finding it inapplicable because that case did not address revisional powers under Section 264 but concerned a post filing deduction without a revised return.
Revisional powers under Section 264 were held to be broad and aimed at preventing miscarriage of justice and granting relief to an assessee even where the assessee committed mistakes in the original return; consequently the revision application should have been considered and the impugned order under Section 264 was set aside. The court distinguished the Supreme Court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd., finding it inapplicable because that case did not address revisional powers under Section 264 but concerned a post filing deduction without a revised return.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.