https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19488 HC held the Tribunal erred in setting aside the Commissioner's revision under s.263 and in concluding Explanation 3 to s.43(1) was inapplicable merely because a reconstituted firm emerged after three months with family-member partners. The Court found the assessing officer had not applied his mind; disclosure by the assessee did not bar revisional jurisdiction. The matter must be remitted for the assessing authority to consider whether Explanation 3 applies, and the Commissioner was justified in invoking s.263 where the correct legal provisions had not been examined. en-us Thu, 21 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Oct 2025 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19488 HC held the Tribunal erred in setting aside the Commissioner's revision under s.263 and in concluding Explanation 3 to s.43(1) was inapplicable merely because a reconstituted firm emerged after three months with family-member partners. The Court found the assessing officer had not applied his mind; disclosure by the assessee did not bar revisional jurisdiction. The matter must be remitted for the assessing authority to consider whether Explanation 3 applies, and the Commissioner was justified in invoking s.263 where the correct legal provisions had not been examined. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 21 Jul 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=19488