https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350918 The Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) appropriately applied his mind independently in initiating proceedings under Section 263, based on discrepancies in purchase details and undervaluation of closing stock not addressed by the Assessing Officer (AO). As a result, the Tribunal set aside the CIT's order, deeming the original assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the decision was pronounced on 10/11/2017. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:01:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350918 The Tribunal found that the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) appropriately applied his mind independently in initiating proceedings under Section 263, based on discrepancies in purchase details and undervaluation of closing stock not addressed by the Assessing Officer (AO). As a result, the Tribunal set aside the CIT's order, deeming the original assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. The appeal of the assessee was allowed, and the decision was pronounced on 10/11/2017. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 10 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350918