https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55980 Section 263 revision was upheld where the original assessment treated cash of Rs. 6,05,000 on a substantive basis despite the assessee's own earlier statement that it belonged to the angadia firm. The retraction was found unreliable, and the claim that the amount arose from diamond business was unsupported by books, bank records, or other credible evidence. In these circumstances, the assessment order was treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue, and the Commissioner was justified in directing that the amount be assessed on a protective basis. en-us Tue, 03 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:36:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55980 Section 263 revision was upheld where the original assessment treated cash of Rs. 6,05,000 on a substantive basis despite the assessee's own earlier statement that it belonged to the angadia firm. The retraction was found unreliable, and the claim that the amount arose from diamond business was unsupported by books, bank records, or other credible evidence. In these circumstances, the assessment order was treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue, and the Commissioner was justified in directing that the amount be assessed on a protective basis. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 03 Jan 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=55980