https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369535 The Tribunal set aside the revision order issued by the CIT(E) under Section 263, deeming it procedurally flawed due to inadequate opportunity for the assessee to respond. Regarding the genuineness of rent payment to B.L. Ranwa HUF, the Tribunal found the CIT(E) lacked evidence to support its claim, as previous assessments had accepted the rental income. Additionally, the alleged income from the medical shop run by Smt. Kamla Ranwa was deemed non-existent for the year under review. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, rendering the CIT(E)'s order ineffective. en-us Fri, 26 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Oct 2018 17:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369535 The Tribunal set aside the revision order issued by the CIT(E) under Section 263, deeming it procedurally flawed due to inadequate opportunity for the assessee to respond. Regarding the genuineness of rent payment to B.L. Ranwa HUF, the Tribunal found the CIT(E) lacked evidence to support its claim, as previous assessments had accepted the rental income. Additionally, the alleged income from the medical shop run by Smt. Kamla Ranwa was deemed non-existent for the year under review. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's appeal, rendering the CIT(E)'s order ineffective. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 26 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369535