https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306961 The tribunal found the exercise of revisionary powers by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) under Section 263 invalid. The tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted adequate enquiries regarding the addition under Section 68 for share capital and share premium. The tribunal emphasized that the Pr. CIT's observations indicated a disagreement rather than a legitimate ground for revision. The tribunal compared the facts with the previous assessment year and concluded that the AO's actions were justified, quashing the Pr. CIT's order and allowing the assessee's appeal. en-us Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Mar 2023 08:57:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306961 The tribunal found the exercise of revisionary powers by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Pr. CIT) under Section 263 invalid. The tribunal held that the Assessing Officer (AO) had conducted adequate enquiries regarding the addition under Section 68 for share capital and share premium. The tribunal emphasized that the Pr. CIT's observations indicated a disagreement rather than a legitimate ground for revision. The tribunal compared the facts with the previous assessment year and concluded that the AO's actions were justified, quashing the Pr. CIT's order and allowing the assessee's appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306961