https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393638 The Tribunal quashed the revision order under Section 263, stating that the AO had applied his mind to the issue of interest on arbitration awards and had taken a possible view. The assessment order could not be termed as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of consistency and found that the AO's action was in line with the revenue's position in earlier years. The appeal was allowed to the extent indicated in the order. en-us Tue, 17 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Aug 2020 10:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393638 The Tribunal quashed the revision order under Section 263, stating that the AO had applied his mind to the issue of interest on arbitration awards and had taken a possible view. The assessment order could not be termed as erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal emphasized the principle of consistency and found that the AO's action was in line with the revenue's position in earlier years. The appeal was allowed to the extent indicated in the order. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393638