https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14395 The High Court upheld the exercise of revisional jurisdiction by the Commissioner, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. The court determined that the amount received for the destruction of bottles should be treated as a capital receipt since the bottles were considered capital assets. The court found that the Commissioner was within his powers to exercise revisional jurisdiction, emphasizing that the question of the treatment of the amount received was not part of the appeal, thus supporting the Revenue's position on the matter. en-us Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:01:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14395 The High Court upheld the exercise of revisional jurisdiction by the Commissioner, ruling in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee. The court determined that the amount received for the destruction of bottles should be treated as a capital receipt since the bottles were considered capital assets. The court found that the Commissioner was within his powers to exercise revisional jurisdiction, emphasizing that the question of the treatment of the amount received was not part of the appeal, thus supporting the Revenue's position on the matter. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 20 Dec 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14395