Beardsell Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

counsels: s.s. mani, for the appellant., s. ganapathy l`yer, for the respondent head note: income tax revision under s. 263--erroneous and prejudicial - order--book profits computed under s. 115j without considering revaluation of investmentratio & held:the power of revision under section 263 can be exercised by the commissioner when the following factors co-exist : (a) there should be a proceeding under the act, (b) in such proceeding the assessing officer must have passed an order; and (c) the commissioner should consider that the said order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. the assessee's authorised representative has not challenged the lacking of any of the above factors in the order passed under section 263 except that on merit that the loss on revaluation of investments and reserve for doubtful debts could not be added in the profits for the purpose of section 115j of the income tax act. from the order the commissioner has given the specific finding after hearing the assessee-company that the assessment order is erroneous and is prejudicial to the interests of revenue. thus, the order of the commissioner under section 263 is upheld. in debiting such type of expenses under section 115j is not only a colourable device to avaid the payment of revenue but also on substance it is an effect to dodge the revenue.case law analysis:state bank of patiala v. cit applied.application:also to current assessment year.a.y.:1988-89dt.ord.:23-9-1998decision:in favour of revenueincome tax act 1961 s.115jincome tax act 1961 s.263 itat, madras'kbench n.d. raghavan, j.m. & p.k. bansal, a.m.