https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36968 The High Court held that the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax had jurisdiction under section 263 to revise the ITO's assessment orders for the years 1967-68 and 1968-69, despite the absence of penalty notices. The term "assessment" was interpreted broadly to include the determination of liability and penalties. Failure to invoke penalty provisions during assessment proceedings was deemed prejudicial to revenue interests, justifying the Commissioner's revision. The Tribunal's reliance on a Madras High Court decision was deemed incorrect. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the Additional Commissioner's jurisdiction to revise the assessment orders. en-us Tue, 03 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 16:22:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36968 The High Court held that the Additional Commissioner of Income-tax had jurisdiction under section 263 to revise the ITO's assessment orders for the years 1967-68 and 1968-69, despite the absence of penalty notices. The term "assessment" was interpreted broadly to include the determination of liability and penalties. Failure to invoke penalty provisions during assessment proceedings was deemed prejudicial to revenue interests, justifying the Commissioner's revision. The Tribunal's reliance on a Madras High Court decision was deemed incorrect. The High Court set aside the Tribunal's decision, ruling in favor of the Additional Commissioner's jurisdiction to revise the assessment orders. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Oct 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=36968