https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792143 Revision under section 263 concerned whether share transaction income should be assessed as business income instead of capital gains, whether an advance from a friend was unexplained cash credit under section 68, and whether low withdrawals justified addition. The ITAT treated the issues as allowed for statistical purposes and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of the facts and evidence in accordance with law. The Bombay High Court noted that this view was consistent with its earlier decision in Smt. Sarah Faizal Hawa, and therefore the substantial question of law did not survive for consideration. The appeal was disposed of accordingly. en-us Thu, 12 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 May 2026 08:27:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792143 Revision under section 263 concerned whether share transaction income should be assessed as business income instead of capital gains, whether an advance from a friend was unexplained cash credit under section 68, and whether low withdrawals justified addition. The ITAT treated the issues as allowed for statistical purposes and restored the matter to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination of the facts and evidence in accordance with law. The Bombay High Court noted that this view was consistent with its earlier decision in Smt. Sarah Faizal Hawa, and therefore the substantial question of law did not survive for consideration. The appeal was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 12 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=792143