<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>CIT&#039;s Section 263 Revision Challenged: AO&#039;s Inquiry into Capital Increase Deemed Adequate, No Error or Revenue Prejudice Found.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64050</link>
    <description>Revision u/s 263 by CIT - substantial increase in the capital account - In the present case the Ld. Pr. CIT on the one hand mentioned that the assessee did not provide details of substantial increase in capital in a year, on the other hand, she mentioned that the reply was furnished by the assessee relating to addition in capital account which was reproduced in para 6 of the impugned order. In the present case, it cannot be said that the AO did not make inquiries / verification relating to increase in capital account of the assessee as alleged by the Ld. Pr. CIT. - it cannot be said that the order passed by the AO was erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2022 08:29:43 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2022 08:29:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>CIT&#039;s Section 263 Revision Challenged: AO&#039;s Inquiry into Capital Increase Deemed Adequate, No Error or Revenue Prejudice Found.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64050</link>
      <description>Revision u/s 263 by CIT - substantial increase in the capital account - In the present case the Ld. Pr. CIT on the one hand mentioned that the assessee did not provide details of substantial increase in capital in a year, on the other hand, she mentioned that the reply was furnished by the assessee relating to addition in capital account which was reproduced in para 6 of the impugned order. In the present case, it cannot be said that the AO did not make inquiries / verification relating to increase in capital account of the assessee as alleged by the Ld. Pr. CIT. - it cannot be said that the order passed by the AO was erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2022 08:29:43 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=64050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>