https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326456 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's revision order under section 263 for the assessment year 2004-05. The appeal involved the failure to set off losses in export of trading goods when computing deduction under section 80HHC. The revised deduction was adjusted to Rs. 67,47,326 instead of the earlier Rs. 4,48,59,326 claimed. The Tribunal clarified that the revision proceedings did not address the computation of deduction for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) liability under section 115JB, dismissing the appeal based on the conditions for invoking section 263. en-us Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 15 Apr 2016 11:19:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326456 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's revision order under section 263 for the assessment year 2004-05. The appeal involved the failure to set off losses in export of trading goods when computing deduction under section 80HHC. The revised deduction was adjusted to Rs. 67,47,326 instead of the earlier Rs. 4,48,59,326 claimed. The Tribunal clarified that the revision proceedings did not address the computation of deduction for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) liability under section 115JB, dismissing the appeal based on the conditions for invoking section 263. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326456