https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460733 Delay of 166 days in filing the appeal was condoned because the assessee showed that the delay arose from mistaken legal advice and was not deliberate. Revision under section 263 was held unsustainable because the assessment on deduction of interest income from deposits with a cooperative bank under section 80P(2)(d) was supported by binding jurisdictional precedent, so the order could not be treated as both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The revisionary order was quashed. en-us Thu, 14 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 13 Feb 2025 19:08:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460733 Delay of 166 days in filing the appeal was condoned because the assessee showed that the delay arose from mistaken legal advice and was not deliberate. Revision under section 263 was held unsustainable because the assessment on deduction of interest income from deposits with a cooperative bank under section 80P(2)(d) was supported by binding jurisdictional precedent, so the order could not be treated as both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. The revisionary order was quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 14 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460733