https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64538 Revision under s 263 was upheld because the assessment order contained no discussion or reasoning on allowability of deductions under ss 43B, 80HHC, 80HH and 80-I, rendering it erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue; consequently, assumption of jurisdiction was sustained. On merits, excise duty payments were held deductible under s 43B, following binding Tribunal precedent, and the contrary revisionary direction was set aside. Interest earned on short-term deployment of surplus funds was treated as business income inextricably linked with borrowings; therefore, netting of interest was allowed and the resultant profits qualified for deduction under s 80HHC, and likewise under ss 80HH and 80-I as income derived from the industrial undertaking. The revisionary directions were cancelled and the appeal was partly allowed. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Dec 2025 12:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64538 Revision under s 263 was upheld because the assessment order contained no discussion or reasoning on allowability of deductions under ss 43B, 80HHC, 80HH and 80-I, rendering it erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue; consequently, assumption of jurisdiction was sustained. On merits, excise duty payments were held deductible under s 43B, following binding Tribunal precedent, and the contrary revisionary direction was set aside. Interest earned on short-term deployment of surplus funds was treated as business income inextricably linked with borrowings; therefore, netting of interest was allowed and the resultant profits qualified for deduction under s 80HHC, and likewise under ss 80HH and 80-I as income derived from the industrial undertaking. The revisionary directions were cancelled and the appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Mar 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=64538