https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289356 Failure to disclose a material receipt in the return justified reassessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, which applied where the assessee had not fully and truly disclosed all material particulars and the action was within limitation. Interest of Rs. 1,16,259 on bank deposits retained its character as interest and was therefore revenue income assessable in the year of actual receipt. Litigation expenses incurred to establish title to the deposits were capital in nature, because expenditure to secure title to a capital asset is not deductible as revenue expenditure. en-us Thu, 10 May 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Jul 2020 16:41:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289356 Failure to disclose a material receipt in the return justified reassessment under section 34(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, which applied where the assessee had not fully and truly disclosed all material particulars and the action was within limitation. Interest of Rs. 1,16,259 on bank deposits retained its character as interest and was therefore revenue income assessable in the year of actual receipt. Litigation expenses incurred to establish title to the deposits were capital in nature, because expenditure to secure title to a capital asset is not deductible as revenue expenditure. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 May 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289356