https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14841 The High Court of Madras, with Judge R. Jayasimha Babu presiding, ruled that attempting to revise an order based on consequences not considered at the time of granting permission under section 263 of the Income-tax Act was unjust. The Court held that the Commissioner's approval could not be revoked due to subsequent realizations by a successor Commissioner. The notice issued by the successor Commissioner was deemed unsustainable, leading to the quashing of the notice, allowing the writ petition, and dismissing the related application as unnecessary. en-us Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:55:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14841 The High Court of Madras, with Judge R. Jayasimha Babu presiding, ruled that attempting to revise an order based on consequences not considered at the time of granting permission under section 263 of the Income-tax Act was unjust. The Court held that the Commissioner's approval could not be revoked due to subsequent realizations by a successor Commissioner. The notice issued by the successor Commissioner was deemed unsustainable, leading to the quashing of the notice, allowing the writ petition, and dismissing the related application as unnecessary. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 Sep 1998 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=14841