https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432457 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) could not invoke jurisdiction under Section 263 merely due to a difference in opinion. It found that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted exhaustive inquiries, applied his mind, and taken a plausible view regarding the share premium issue. The Tribunal concluded that the AO's order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, quashing the PCIT's order under Section 263 and upholding the AO's decision. en-us Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jan 2023 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432457 The Tribunal held that the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) could not invoke jurisdiction under Section 263 merely due to a difference in opinion. It found that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted exhaustive inquiries, applied his mind, and taken a plausible view regarding the share premium issue. The Tribunal concluded that the AO's order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue, quashing the PCIT's order under Section 263 and upholding the AO's decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432457