https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395176 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 263 for the second time as the conditions for invoking the section were not satisfied. It was found that the Assessing Officer complied with the directions given in the first revisional order, and the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share capital were established. The reassessment order was deemed plausible and not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, leading to the quashing of the Principal Commissioner's order and allowing the assessee's appeal. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 May 2020 11:09:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395176 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax lacked jurisdiction to invoke section 263 for the second time as the conditions for invoking the section were not satisfied. It was found that the Assessing Officer complied with the directions given in the first revisional order, and the identity, creditworthiness, and genuineness of the share capital were established. The reassessment order was deemed plausible and not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, leading to the quashing of the Principal Commissioner's order and allowing the assessee's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395176