https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29455 The article explains that, under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner is treated as subordinate to the Commissioner in the revisional hierarchy, so revision under section 34 can be invoked in favour of the assessee. It also states that wealth-tax paid on agricultural land is not barred as a deduction in principle under section 5(j), but allowance depends on proof that the expenditure was wholly and exclusively incurred for deriving agricultural income. The refusing orders were set aside, the revisions were restored, and the matter was left for fresh decision according to law. en-us Thu, 29 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Mar 2010 10:28:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29455 The article explains that, under the Agricultural Income-tax Act, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner is treated as subordinate to the Commissioner in the revisional hierarchy, so revision under section 34 can be invoked in favour of the assessee. It also states that wealth-tax paid on agricultural land is not barred as a deduction in principle under section 5(j), but allowance depends on proof that the expenditure was wholly and exclusively incurred for deriving agricultural income. The refusing orders were set aside, the revisions were restored, and the matter was left for fresh decision according to law. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Oct 1981 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29455