https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352198 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. PCIT's order under Section 263, determining it was both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue due to lack of inquiry into the genuineness of purchases. It affirmed the Ld. PCIT's jurisdiction to direct further inquiries beyond those previously decided by the CIT(A). The disallowed purchases could represent unexplained investments, impacting the genuineness of the investment and preventing the assessee from claiming bogus expenditure. The Tribunal found the order timely and valid, dismissing the appeal in its entirety. en-us Fri, 01 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Dec 2017 08:26:26 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352198 The Tribunal upheld the Ld. PCIT's order under Section 263, determining it was both erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue due to lack of inquiry into the genuineness of purchases. It affirmed the Ld. PCIT's jurisdiction to direct further inquiries beyond those previously decided by the CIT(A). The disallowed purchases could represent unexplained investments, impacting the genuineness of the investment and preventing the assessee from claiming bogus expenditure. The Tribunal found the order timely and valid, dismissing the appeal in its entirety. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352198