https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405079 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) erroneously assumed jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act as the reassessment order did not address the issue that formed the basis for reopening the case. The Tribunal also found that the reassessment order was not erroneous regarding the share capital and premium received by the assessee. Additionally, it was determined that the order passed under Section 263 was time-barred. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Pr. CIT's order and restored the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. en-us Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Mar 2021 09:14:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405079 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) erroneously assumed jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act as the reassessment order did not address the issue that formed the basis for reopening the case. The Tribunal also found that the reassessment order was not erroneous regarding the share capital and premium received by the assessee. Additionally, it was determined that the order passed under Section 263 was time-barred. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Pr. CIT's order and restored the reassessment order passed by the Assessing Officer, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 08 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=405079