https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390470 The Tribunal found that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) usurped jurisdiction under Section 263 erroneously, as the Assessing Officer (AO) had adequately investigated the short-term capital loss claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal determined that the AO's order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, leading to the quashing of the Pr. CIT's revision order. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. en-us Tue, 31 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jan 2020 12:59:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390470 The Tribunal found that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) usurped jurisdiction under Section 263 erroneously, as the Assessing Officer (AO) had adequately investigated the short-term capital loss claimed by the assessee. The Tribunal determined that the AO's order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, leading to the quashing of the Pr. CIT's revision order. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 31 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390470