https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295422 In a Revenue appeal under section 260A, the HC held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal had followed its own earlier order in the assessee's case on identical facts and the Revenue showed no material distinction in fact or law. The Court emphasised that, although res judicata does not strictly apply in tax matters, the principles of consistency and certainty require a justifying change before reopening an accepted position. As no distinguishing feature or legal development was demonstrated, the challenge was not maintainable. en-us Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Nov 2024 17:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295422 In a Revenue appeal under section 260A, the HC held that no substantial question of law arose where the Tribunal had followed its own earlier order in the assessee's case on identical facts and the Revenue showed no material distinction in fact or law. The Court emphasised that, although res judicata does not strictly apply in tax matters, the principles of consistency and certainty require a justifying change before reopening an accepted position. As no distinguishing feature or legal development was demonstrated, the challenge was not maintainable. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 06 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295422