https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10343 A regularly followed recognised accounting method under section 145 must be accepted unless it fails to disclose true income, and revision under section 263 is not justified unless the assessment is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. Applying those principles, the assessee-company was treated as an industrial company because the record supported manufacture or production for the relevant tax purpose, and the Revenue's contrary challenge failed. The provision for contingencies booked under the percentage completion method was also not taxable in the year in question, since the amount was consistently carried to tax in later years as the contract progressed and the method did not distort income. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable. en-us Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 08:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10343 A regularly followed recognised accounting method under section 145 must be accepted unless it fails to disclose true income, and revision under section 263 is not justified unless the assessment is both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. Applying those principles, the assessee-company was treated as an industrial company because the record supported manufacture or production for the relevant tax purpose, and the Revenue's contrary challenge failed. The provision for contingencies booked under the percentage completion method was also not taxable in the year in question, since the amount was consistently carried to tax in later years as the contract progressed and the method did not distort income. The revisional order was therefore unsustainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=10343