Faceless assessment notice must cover specific prejudicial variations; unexplained final additions without notice breach section 144B and natural just...
Revision under Section 263 was held vitiated where the revisional opinion reallocating R&D expenditure to eligible undertakings rested on presumption and conjecture rather than concrete evidence; the Assessing Officer had conducted a full enquiry and permissibly allowed the R&D deduction. The Tribunal found the revisionary exercise to be materially influenced by an audit objection and not an independent satisfaction, quashed the revision order and restored the assessment order of the AO, allowing the assessee's appeal.
Revision under Section 263 was held vitiated where the revisional opinion reallocating R&D expenditure to eligible undertakings rested on presumption and conjecture rather than concrete evidence; the Assessing Officer had conducted a full enquiry and permissibly allowed the R&D deduction. The Tribunal found the revisionary exercise to be materially influenced by an audit objection and not an independent satisfaction, quashed the revision order and restored the assessment order of the AO, allowing the assessee's appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.