https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441478 The challenge under revision proceedings focused on whether the assessing officer's decisions on stock compensation taxation, US state tax treatment, foreign remittance TDS, and brand lease required revision. On stock compensation the appellate record showed a factual misconstruction by the revisional authority, so revision was unwarranted. On US state taxes the AO had applied mind after s.142(1) enquiries and the revisional observations could not substitute for that analysis, so no revision followed. On foreign remittance TDS and lease of brand free of cost the AO adopted possible views after enquiry; consequently those assessments could not be disturbed under revision. Result: revision denied; decision against revenue. en-us Tue, 18 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Feb 2026 12:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441478 The challenge under revision proceedings focused on whether the assessing officer's decisions on stock compensation taxation, US state tax treatment, foreign remittance TDS, and brand lease required revision. On stock compensation the appellate record showed a factual misconstruction by the revisional authority, so revision was unwarranted. On US state taxes the AO had applied mind after s.142(1) enquiries and the revisional observations could not substitute for that analysis, so no revision followed. On foreign remittance TDS and lease of brand free of cost the AO adopted possible views after enquiry; consequently those assessments could not be disturbed under revision. Result: revision denied; decision against revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 18 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441478