https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367512 Revision under s. 263 was upheld on the issue whether the assessment was "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" due to inadequate inquiry into alleged hawala trading. The HC held that the AO failed to comply with the statutory duty to conduct proper probe and inquiry, instead making an estimate and accepting a vague, general explanation, particularly when the assessee effectively had no answer to the notice. Reliable information from VAT/Sales Tax authorities regarding transactions with suspected hawala dealers justified invocation of s. 263. The HC found no legal error or perversity in the Commissioner's or Tribunal's orders, and dismissed the challenge, sustaining revision. en-us Tue, 11 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jan 2026 17:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367512 Revision under s. 263 was upheld on the issue whether the assessment was "erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue" due to inadequate inquiry into alleged hawala trading. The HC held that the AO failed to comply with the statutory duty to conduct proper probe and inquiry, instead making an estimate and accepting a vague, general explanation, particularly when the assessee effectively had no answer to the notice. Reliable information from VAT/Sales Tax authorities regarding transactions with suspected hawala dealers justified invocation of s. 263. The HC found no legal error or perversity in the Commissioner's or Tribunal's orders, and dismissed the challenge, sustaining revision. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367512