https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437928 The Tribunal concluded that the assessment order for AY 2015-16 was not erroneous or prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. It found that the Assessing Officer had adequately inquired into the capital introduction by partners and that issues pending before the CIT(A) could not be revised under section 263. The Pr. CIT's order was set aside, and the assessee's appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing that the AO's application of the law correctly was crucial, regardless of the Commissioner's opinion on the adequacy of the inquiry. en-us Fri, 12 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 May 2023 08:38:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437928 The Tribunal concluded that the assessment order for AY 2015-16 was not erroneous or prejudicial to the Revenue's interest. It found that the Assessing Officer had adequately inquired into the capital introduction by partners and that issues pending before the CIT(A) could not be revised under section 263. The Pr. CIT's order was set aside, and the assessee's appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing that the AO's application of the law correctly was crucial, regardless of the Commissioner's opinion on the adequacy of the inquiry. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 12 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=437928