https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276448 Reassessment under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was upheld because the original assessment record did not show any informed opinion by the officer on the true nature of the receipt; mere availability of account books or a possible enquiry was insufficient, and the successor officer acted on information that income had escaped assessment rather than on a change of opinion. The sum received on termination of the managing agency was also held taxable as a revenue receipt: the Tribunal found the termination was not genuine, the payment was collusive and business-related, and the amount was not a casual or non-recurring windfall exempt under section 4(3)(vii). en-us Tue, 10 Jul 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Nov 2018 12:52:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276448 Reassessment under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 was upheld because the original assessment record did not show any informed opinion by the officer on the true nature of the receipt; mere availability of account books or a possible enquiry was insufficient, and the successor officer acted on information that income had escaped assessment rather than on a change of opinion. The sum received on termination of the managing agency was also held taxable as a revenue receipt: the Tribunal found the termination was not genuine, the payment was collusive and business-related, and the amount was not a casual or non-recurring windfall exempt under section 4(3)(vii). Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 10 Jul 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276448