https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22956 The High Court held that the addition of Rs. 1,00,000 to a firm's trading results, based on an agreement with an unauthorized person, was invalid under section 288 of the Income-tax Act. The Court found that the financial adviser lacked proper authorization, rendering the agreement unenforceable against the firm. As there was no written authorization proving the adviser's authority, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The case will be referred back to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for further proceedings. en-us Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Dec 2009 15:40:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22956 The High Court held that the addition of Rs. 1,00,000 to a firm's trading results, based on an agreement with an unauthorized person, was invalid under section 288 of the Income-tax Act. The Court found that the financial adviser lacked proper authorization, rendering the agreement unenforceable against the firm. As there was no written authorization proving the adviser's authority, the Court ruled in favor of the assessee, dismissing the Revenue's appeal. The case will be referred back to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for further proceedings. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 20 Aug 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=22956