https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304970 The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Officer (AO) was not required to examine the issue of payment to contractors in a case selected for limited scrutiny. It concluded that the assessment order under section 143(3) was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, ultimately quashing the Pr. CIT's order and upholding the assessment order dated 11.09.2017. en-us Mon, 07 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Nov 2022 08:00:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304970 The Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, holding that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal emphasized that the Assessing Officer (AO) was not required to examine the issue of payment to contractors in a case selected for limited scrutiny. It concluded that the assessment order under section 143(3) was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, ultimately quashing the Pr. CIT's order and upholding the assessment order dated 11.09.2017. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 07 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304970