https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66043 The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the initiation of action under sub-sec. (4) of sec. 11 of the Income-tax Act was not justified. It emphasized that sub-sec. (4) was intended to uncover tax evasion through manipulation of account books, not for the application or expenditure of income by the business undertaking. The tribunal found no evidence of manipulation or tax evasion by the assessee and concluded that the Income-tax Officer had wrongly compared gross income with net income. Consequently, all appeals by the assessee were allowed, and the directions under sec. 263 were quashed. en-us Tue, 16 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Feb 2011 10:36:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66043 The tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the initiation of action under sub-sec. (4) of sec. 11 of the Income-tax Act was not justified. It emphasized that sub-sec. (4) was intended to uncover tax evasion through manipulation of account books, not for the application or expenditure of income by the business undertaking. The tribunal found no evidence of manipulation or tax evasion by the assessee and concluded that the Income-tax Officer had wrongly compared gross income with net income. Consequently, all appeals by the assessee were allowed, and the directions under sec. 263 were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 May 1989 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=66043