https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276450 The proviso to Section 6(1) of the U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1949 was read as barring any change in the elected method of computation unless the Board of Revenue granted permission, and the restriction was not confined to a single assessment year. Refusal of permission was upheld because the record showed consideration of the applications and revenue loss was a relevant factor in a taxing statute. The proviso was also sustained against challenges under Articles 14 and 19(1)(f), as conferral of discretion in a tax scheme was not unconstitutional discrimination. Mandamus was unavailable to compel forms or reconsideration once the discretion had been lawfully exercised. en-us Tue, 09 Sep 1952 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Nov 2018 13:02:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276450 The proviso to Section 6(1) of the U.P. Agricultural Income Tax Act, 1949 was read as barring any change in the elected method of computation unless the Board of Revenue granted permission, and the restriction was not confined to a single assessment year. Refusal of permission was upheld because the record showed consideration of the applications and revenue loss was a relevant factor in a taxing statute. The proviso was also sustained against challenges under Articles 14 and 19(1)(f), as conferral of discretion in a tax scheme was not unconstitutional discrimination. Mandamus was unavailable to compel forms or reconsideration once the discretion had been lawfully exercised. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 09 Sep 1952 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276450