https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456576 The ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding its previous decision that the delay in claiming an enhanced refund was not attributable to the respondent. The Tribunal found no substantial question of law, affirming that the Assessing Officer's decision to include interest under Section 244A was reasonable. Consequently, the CIT's order under Section 263 was canceled, as the revisional jurisdiction could not be exercised when the Assessing Officer's decision was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the revenue's interest. The Tribunal relied on the precedent set in State Bank of India vs. DCIT-2, reinforcing the validity of the Assessing Officer's approach. en-us Wed, 07 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 May 2026 11:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456576 The ITAT dismissed the appeal, upholding its previous decision that the delay in claiming an enhanced refund was not attributable to the respondent. The Tribunal found no substantial question of law, affirming that the Assessing Officer's decision to include interest under Section 244A was reasonable. Consequently, the CIT's order under Section 263 was canceled, as the revisional jurisdiction could not be exercised when the Assessing Officer's decision was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the revenue's interest. The Tribunal relied on the precedent set in State Bank of India vs. DCIT-2, reinforcing the validity of the Assessing Officer's approach. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 07 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456576