https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68056 Revisional interference under section 263 was justified because the assessment record showed that the Assessing Officer had not verified a material expense claim, so the revisional order was sustained. The restriction of interest at 15% was deleted because the assessee had consistently paid and received interest at 24% per annum, and that rate had already been accepted in an earlier year. The addition of truck-account income was also deleted because it was not part of the basis for the section 263 revision and similar additions had been deleted on merits. The disallowance of the expense claim of Rs. 2,500 was sustained because the claim had not been properly verified. en-us Wed, 10 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Mar 2011 16:54:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68056 Revisional interference under section 263 was justified because the assessment record showed that the Assessing Officer had not verified a material expense claim, so the revisional order was sustained. The restriction of interest at 15% was deleted because the assessee had consistently paid and received interest at 24% per annum, and that rate had already been accepted in an earlier year. The addition of truck-account income was also deleted because it was not part of the basis for the section 263 revision and similar additions had been deleted on merits. The disallowance of the expense claim of Rs. 2,500 was sustained because the claim had not been properly verified. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Feb 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=68056