https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15346 The High Court analyzed discrepancies in dates to determine the validity of the assessment order under section 153(1) of the Income-tax Act. The Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was time-barred, despite arguments on the certified copy. The expenditure for renovating leased premises was classified as revenue, not capital, as it was for business purposes. The addition of notional interest on an interest-free advance was rejected, emphasizing the lack of evidence. The Court provided detailed rulings on each issue, clarifying legal interpretations and decisions. en-us Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 10:26:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15346 The High Court analyzed discrepancies in dates to determine the validity of the assessment order under section 153(1) of the Income-tax Act. The Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue was time-barred, despite arguments on the certified copy. The expenditure for renovating leased premises was classified as revenue, not capital, as it was for business purposes. The addition of notional interest on an interest-free advance was rejected, emphasizing the lack of evidence. The Court provided detailed rulings on each issue, clarifying legal interpretations and decisions. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Dec 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=15346