https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447014 ITAT Cuttack quashed the Pr.CIT's order under Section 263 challenging the original assessment order passed under Section 144 regarding unexplained cash deposits. The tribunal held that Pr.CIT failed to demonstrate how the original assessment order was erroneous or prejudicial to revenue interest, merely directing AO to have a second look at the issue. Since the essential requirement of showing prejudicial and erroneous nature was not met, Section 263 provisions could not be invoked. The assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Dec 2023 09:58:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447014 ITAT Cuttack quashed the Pr.CIT's order under Section 263 challenging the original assessment order passed under Section 144 regarding unexplained cash deposits. The tribunal held that Pr.CIT failed to demonstrate how the original assessment order was erroneous or prejudicial to revenue interest, merely directing AO to have a second look at the issue. Since the essential requirement of showing prejudicial and erroneous nature was not met, Section 263 provisions could not be invoked. The assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 09 Oct 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447014