<?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>2022 (12) TMI 1127 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432010</link>
    <description>The Principal Commissioner cannot invoke revision under section 263 where the Assessing Officer has already examined the limited-scrutiny issue and made enquiries on the assessee&#039;s money-lending activity and bad-debt claim. The assessment record showed that the Assessing Officer considered the bad-debt claim, summoned debtors, recorded statements, and obtained written confirmations from those unable to appear, demonstrating application of mind and proper enquiry on the very matter later sought to be revised. As the revision rested on material already examined in assessment, the Tribunal held that the assessment could not be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on that ground, and the revision order was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2022 09:10:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=699817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 1127 - ITAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432010</link>
      <description>The Principal Commissioner cannot invoke revision under section 263 where the Assessing Officer has already examined the limited-scrutiny issue and made enquiries on the assessee&#039;s money-lending activity and bad-debt claim. The assessment record showed that the Assessing Officer considered the bad-debt claim, summoned debtors, recorded statements, and obtained written confirmations from those unable to appear, demonstrating application of mind and proper enquiry on the very matter later sought to be revised. As the revision rested on material already examined in assessment, the Tribunal held that the assessment could not be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on that ground, and the revision order was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432010</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>