<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (3) TMI 945 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451164</link>
    <description>ITAT Jodhpur quashed PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263, holding that revision was merely based on audit objections without independent application of mind. The tribunal found that AO had examined all four issues raised, called for details, and taken plausible views after considering assessee&#039;s submissions. PCIT failed to establish how AO&#039;s view was incorrect or demonstrate any error prejudicial to revenue interests. The twin conditions under section 263 - that the order must be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue - were not satisfied. Revenue could not justify second proceedings when AO had conducted required enquiry and not violated any conditions under Explanation 2 of Section 263.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:23:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=747724" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 945 - ITAT JODHPUR</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451164</link>
      <description>ITAT Jodhpur quashed PCIT&#039;s revision order u/s 263, holding that revision was merely based on audit objections without independent application of mind. The tribunal found that AO had examined all four issues raised, called for details, and taken plausible views after considering assessee&#039;s submissions. PCIT failed to establish how AO&#039;s view was incorrect or demonstrate any error prejudicial to revenue interests. The twin conditions under section 263 - that the order must be erroneous and prejudicial to revenue - were not satisfied. Revenue could not justify second proceedings when AO had conducted required enquiry and not violated any conditions under Explanation 2 of Section 263.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451164</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>