https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85822 HC held that revisional authority's refusal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 264 was legally untenable. The authority's reasoning that revision was not maintainable because order was appealable and assessee had not filed appeal was contrary to law. Further, the authority's position that intimation under Section 143(1) was not amenable to revision jurisdiction was incorrect, as established in multiple precedents. The court set aside the impugned order dated February 12, 2021, finding both grounds for declining jurisdiction unsustainable. The revision petition was restored to be decided on merits by the revisional authority in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:10:07 +0530 Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:10:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85822 HC held that revisional authority's refusal to exercise jurisdiction under Section 264 was legally untenable. The authority's reasoning that revision was not maintainable because order was appealable and assessee had not filed appeal was contrary to law. Further, the authority's position that intimation under Section 143(1) was not amenable to revision jurisdiction was incorrect, as established in multiple precedents. The court set aside the impugned order dated February 12, 2021, finding both grounds for declining jurisdiction unsustainable. The revision petition was restored to be decided on merits by the revisional authority in accordance with law. Highlights Income Tax Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:10:07 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=85822