https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11951 An assessment marked "not assessable" was treated as acceptance of the return, not rejection of the assessee's claims, so the Assessing Officer should have examined unabsorbed investment allowance, unabsorbed depreciation and unabsorbed development rebate. The failure to scrutinise those items rendered the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On that basis, the Commissioner was justified in invoking revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the reference was answered against the assessee. en-us Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Feb 2010 12:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11951 An assessment marked "not assessable" was treated as acceptance of the return, not rejection of the assessee's claims, so the Assessing Officer should have examined unabsorbed investment allowance, unabsorbed depreciation and unabsorbed development rebate. The failure to scrutinise those items rendered the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On that basis, the Commissioner was justified in invoking revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and the reference was answered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=11951