https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414349 The court held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax can only exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer's order is both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The court emphasized that lack of inquiry, not inadequate inquiry, warrants intervention. The court found that the Assessing Officer had made adequate inquiries regarding Long-Term Capital Loss and bad debts, and the orders were not erroneous. As a result, the revision orders were quashed, and both appeals were allowed. en-us Tue, 05 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Nov 2021 09:31:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414349 The court held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax can only exercise revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 if the Assessing Officer's order is both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. The court emphasized that lack of inquiry, not inadequate inquiry, warrants intervention. The court found that the Assessing Officer had made adequate inquiries regarding Long-Term Capital Loss and bad debts, and the orders were not erroneous. As a result, the revision orders were quashed, and both appeals were allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414349