https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117937 The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, ruling that the assessment reopening under Section 147 was invalid as it lacked the Assessing Officer's independent satisfaction. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the remuneration paid to the partner representing his HUF under Section 40(b) as authorized by the partnership deed and within statutory limits, contrary to the AO's disallowance based on misinterpretation of the law. The Tribunal emphasized that the CBDT circular's requirement for specific quantification did not apply when the partnership deed allowed for determination within statutory limits. en-us Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:58:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117937 The Tribunal dismissed the revenue's appeal, ruling that the assessment reopening under Section 147 was invalid as it lacked the Assessing Officer's independent satisfaction. Additionally, the Tribunal allowed the remuneration paid to the partner representing his HUF under Section 40(b) as authorized by the partnership deed and within statutory limits, contrary to the AO's disallowance based on misinterpretation of the law. The Tribunal emphasized that the CBDT circular's requirement for specific quantification did not apply when the partnership deed allowed for determination within statutory limits. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 08 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117937