https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75376 Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and rule 33 of the Income-tax Rules, 1922 were construed as subject to appellate correction under section 31(3): the majority held that, on an assessee's appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner could reject the accounting method earlier accepted by the Income-tax Officer and could also apply rule 33 where the assessment had omitted to do so. The reasoning was that the officer's initial opinion under the proviso to section 13 and under rule 33 was not final against review, and the appellate authority could examine and correct every process leading to assessment. Bhagwati, J. dissented, treating the power to reject the accounting method as vested exclusively in the Income-tax Officer. en-us Wed, 16 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Sep 2014 17:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75376 Section 13 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 and rule 33 of the Income-tax Rules, 1922 were construed as subject to appellate correction under section 31(3): the majority held that, on an assessee's appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner could reject the accounting method earlier accepted by the Income-tax Officer and could also apply rule 33 where the assessment had omitted to do so. The reasoning was that the officer's initial opinion under the proviso to section 13 and under rule 33 was not final against review, and the appellate authority could examine and correct every process leading to assessment. Bhagwati, J. dissented, treating the power to reject the accounting method as vested exclusively in the Income-tax Officer. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 16 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75376