https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25198 Revisional orders under the Income-tax Act are not to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless a patent jurisdictional error or an error apparent on the face of the record is shown. The commentary states that the Commissioner's revisional exercise remained within the statutory framework because it was based on the record and CBDT directions, and no breach of those directions was established. It further notes that factual findings on gross profit could not be reappreciated in writ proceedings, and that clubbing separate assessment-year orders in one writ petition was an additional infirmity. The revisional orders were therefore sustained and writ relief was declined. en-us Fri, 19 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:29:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25198 Revisional orders under the Income-tax Act are not to be interfered with in writ jurisdiction unless a patent jurisdictional error or an error apparent on the face of the record is shown. The commentary states that the Commissioner's revisional exercise remained within the statutory framework because it was based on the record and CBDT directions, and no breach of those directions was established. It further notes that factual findings on gross profit could not be reappreciated in writ proceedings, and that clubbing separate assessment-year orders in one writ petition was an additional infirmity. The revisional orders were therefore sustained and writ relief was declined. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 19 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=25198