https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255913 The Tribunal found that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The CIT-I, Jodhpur's decision to set aside the assessment order was deemed unjustified as the AO had conducted thorough examinations and inquiries into the relevant financial transactions. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, reinstating the original assessment order and emphasizing that mere dissatisfaction of the CIT-I with the assessment process does not warrant revision under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. en-us Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:31:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255913 The Tribunal found that the assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) was not erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The CIT-I, Jodhpur's decision to set aside the assessment order was deemed unjustified as the AO had conducted thorough examinations and inquiries into the relevant financial transactions. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, reinstating the original assessment order and emphasizing that mere dissatisfaction of the CIT-I with the assessment process does not warrant revision under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 16 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255913