https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61930 The appeal was allowed, and the revisional orders of the Commissioner were cancelled. The Tribunal held that the disallowance under section 37(3A) should be applied to each business separately. Additionally, Radha's Perfumery Enterprises qualified for the exemption under section 37(3D) as it transitioned from a partnership to a sole proprietorship and fell within the second year of manufacturing, making the assumption of jurisdiction by the Commissioner under section 263 invalid. en-us Fri, 14 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Jan 2011 11:26:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61930 The appeal was allowed, and the revisional orders of the Commissioner were cancelled. The Tribunal held that the disallowance under section 37(3A) should be applied to each business separately. Additionally, Radha's Perfumery Enterprises qualified for the exemption under section 37(3D) as it transitioned from a partnership to a sole proprietorship and fell within the second year of manufacturing, making the assumption of jurisdiction by the Commissioner under section 263 invalid. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Jun 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=61930