https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392336 The Administrative CIT's decision to invoke revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act was challenged by the assessee. The CIT claimed errors in the adjustment of brought forward losses with book profits under Section 115JB, but the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee. The ITAT found that the method adopted by the assessee for set-off of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation was rational and logical, and the AO had taken a possible view. Citing precedents, the ITAT concluded that the CIT could not rectify a possible view taken by the AO, ultimately quashing the revisionary jurisdiction invoked by the CIT. en-us Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Feb 2020 12:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392336 The Administrative CIT's decision to invoke revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act was challenged by the assessee. The CIT claimed errors in the adjustment of brought forward losses with book profits under Section 115JB, but the ITAT ruled in favor of the assessee. The ITAT found that the method adopted by the assessee for set-off of brought forward business loss and unabsorbed depreciation was rational and logical, and the AO had taken a possible view. Citing precedents, the ITAT concluded that the CIT could not rectify a possible view taken by the AO, ultimately quashing the revisionary jurisdiction invoked by the CIT. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392336