https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14182 Whether an intimation under section 143(1)(a) was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue, so as to support revision under section 263, was identified as a question of law requiring reference under section 256(1). The scope of section 143(1)(a) was also identified as requiring determination in relation to disallowance of an incentive bonus and the non-exempt portion of additional conveyance allowance. The Tribunal's refusal to refer either question was treated as incorrect, and both legal questions were required to be referred to the High Court for its opinion. en-us Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:41:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14182 Whether an intimation under section 143(1)(a) was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue, so as to support revision under section 263, was identified as a question of law requiring reference under section 256(1). The scope of section 143(1)(a) was also identified as requiring determination in relation to disallowance of an incentive bonus and the non-exempt portion of additional conveyance allowance. The Tribunal's refusal to refer either question was treated as incorrect, and both legal questions were required to be referred to the High Court for its opinion. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 20 Oct 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14182