https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307182 Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 could not be invoked where the Assessing Officer had examined the adjustment of derivative loss against presumptive income under section 44AD, raised queries, and accepted the assessee's explanation on the basis of replies and supporting material. On those facts, the assessment was not shown to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue merely because the Principal Commissioner held a different view on permissibility of the adjustment. The revision was therefore held unsustainable and quashed. en-us Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Mar 2023 20:40:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307182 Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 could not be invoked where the Assessing Officer had examined the adjustment of derivative loss against presumptive income under section 44AD, raised queries, and accepted the assessee's explanation on the basis of replies and supporting material. On those facts, the assessment was not shown to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue merely because the Principal Commissioner held a different view on permissibility of the adjustment. The revision was therefore held unsustainable and quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307182