https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346902 The court set aside the notice issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for revision of the assessment order, as the Assessing Officer's decision was deemed plausible and not open to revision. The court upheld the allowance of interest expenditure under section 57(iii) for loans used for investment in a subsidiary company, citing precedent that the deduction does not require actual income generation. The jurisdictional issue regarding the Commissioner's revision powers post-DRP consideration was not addressed, as the primary issue was resolved in favor of the petitioner. en-us Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346902 The court set aside the notice issued by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax for revision of the assessment order, as the Assessing Officer's decision was deemed plausible and not open to revision. The court upheld the allowance of interest expenditure under section 57(iii) for loans used for investment in a subsidiary company, citing precedent that the deduction does not require actual income generation. The jurisdictional issue regarding the Commissioner's revision powers post-DRP consideration was not addressed, as the primary issue was resolved in favor of the petitioner. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 22 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346902