https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261356 A later jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court ruling can justify rectification under section 154 when it declares the correct legal position on an identical issue. Here, the question was whether loss from a pension fund had to be excluded from insurance business income under section 44 read with the First Schedule, or treated separately because related income was exempt under section 10(23AAB). The later ruling held that the pension fund remained within section 44 and that the loss had to be considered in actuarial valuation, making the earlier contrary assessment inconsistent with law. Prior finality of the assessment did not bar rectification on that basis. en-us Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Jul 2015 06:29:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261356 A later jurisdictional High Court or Supreme Court ruling can justify rectification under section 154 when it declares the correct legal position on an identical issue. Here, the question was whether loss from a pension fund had to be excluded from insurance business income under section 44 read with the First Schedule, or treated separately because related income was exempt under section 10(23AAB). The later ruling held that the pension fund remained within section 44 and that the loss had to be considered in actuarial valuation, making the earlier contrary assessment inconsistent with law. Prior finality of the assessment did not bar rectification on that basis. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261356