“Section 297(2)”
The decision most relied on for Section 297(2) is CIT v. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd. (198 ITR 297), cited in 814 judgments on BharatTax.
Leading authorities on Section 297(2)
A court's pronouncement derives its scope and color from the specific questions involved in the case, thus, due regard must always be given to the questions framed before the court when interpreting its judgment.
The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cannot dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution or default in appearance. Under Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, the CIT(A) must decide the appeal on its merits, even in an ex parte proceeding.
Employees' contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified under the respective Acts, are allowable as a deduction under section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the return of income under section 139(1).
The Supreme Court establishes a principle of statutory interpretation that terms like 'assistance' can be construed expansively to include a 'reward', a principle leveraged in income tax cases to determine if receipts such as excise duty exemptions are taxable income or non-taxable capital receipts.
An amendment to a section is declaratory and clarifies the existing legal position, rather than introducing a new rule.
When the Assessing Officer revalues the closing stock, the opening stock must also be revalued on the same basis to ensure consistency in the method of accounting and proper computation of business income.