https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24833 A High Court dealing with a reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act retains limited inherent power under section 151 CPC to recall or set aside an earlier order where necessary to prevent miscarriage of justice or correct a grave and palpable error, even though a review under Order XLVII Rule 1 is not maintainable in that jurisdiction. The commentary also states that weighted deduction under section 35B was not available on commission paid in India to Indian agents because the record did not establish that the expenditure was incurred for obtaining information about foreign markets or that the statutory conditions were otherwise proved. The corrective power exists in principle, but interference is unwarranted absent a legally cognisable error. en-us Tue, 15 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Oct 2018 14:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24833 A High Court dealing with a reference under section 256 of the Income-tax Act retains limited inherent power under section 151 CPC to recall or set aside an earlier order where necessary to prevent miscarriage of justice or correct a grave and palpable error, even though a review under Order XLVII Rule 1 is not maintainable in that jurisdiction. The commentary also states that weighted deduction under section 35B was not available on commission paid in India to Indian agents because the record did not establish that the expenditure was incurred for obtaining information about foreign markets or that the statutory conditions were otherwise proved. The corrective power exists in principle, but interference is unwarranted absent a legally cognisable error. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24833