https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439238 The Tribunal held that the revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 was not valid as the original assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. The AO's inquiries into bad debts were deemed adequate, with the assessee providing detailed responses. The Tribunal found the AO's acceptance of the bad debts claim to be supported by judicial precedents, rejecting the Pr. CIT's concerns. It was concluded that the bad debts were revenue in nature and allowable as business losses. The appeal was allowed, and the revisionary order was quashed, emphasizing that revision cannot be based solely on differing views without legal merit. en-us Fri, 16 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Jun 2023 15:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439238 The Tribunal held that the revisional jurisdiction under Section 263 was not valid as the original assessment order was not erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. The AO's inquiries into bad debts were deemed adequate, with the assessee providing detailed responses. The Tribunal found the AO's acceptance of the bad debts claim to be supported by judicial precedents, rejecting the Pr. CIT's concerns. It was concluded that the bad debts were revenue in nature and allowable as business losses. The appeal was allowed, and the revisionary order was quashed, emphasizing that revision cannot be based solely on differing views without legal merit. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 16 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439238