https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70823 Reassessment under ss.147/148 was upheld: post-1.4.1989 the only jurisdictional precondition is the AO's "reason to believe" escapement, and the recorded belief regarding wrongful deduction for a regulatory contribution existed and was communicated; subsequent failure on merits did not vitiate initiation. Consequently, the first appellate authority's enhancement power under s.251 was sustained. On merits, rehabilitation expenditure on heavy machinery was held to be current repairs under s.31 as it only restored existing assets without enduring capital advantage; deduction was directed. Amounts collected as sale proceeds and paid to a regulatory account were treated as trading income and payment as mere application (no overriding title); deduction was denied. Employee pension contributions were deductible under s.36(1)(va) where paid to the fund within due dates; deduction was directed. Expenditure to acquire/enjoy surface rights over leasehold land yielded enduring benefit and was capital; deduction was disallowed. en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2025 16:55:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70823 Reassessment under ss.147/148 was upheld: post-1.4.1989 the only jurisdictional precondition is the AO's "reason to believe" escapement, and the recorded belief regarding wrongful deduction for a regulatory contribution existed and was communicated; subsequent failure on merits did not vitiate initiation. Consequently, the first appellate authority's enhancement power under s.251 was sustained. On merits, rehabilitation expenditure on heavy machinery was held to be current repairs under s.31 as it only restored existing assets without enduring capital advantage; deduction was directed. Amounts collected as sale proceeds and paid to a regulatory account were treated as trading income and payment as mere application (no overriding title); deduction was denied. Employee pension contributions were deductible under s.36(1)(va) where paid to the fund within due dates; deduction was directed. Expenditure to acquire/enjoy surface rights over leasehold land yielded enduring benefit and was capital; deduction was disallowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Feb 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=70823