https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772544 Karnataka HC set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for merit consideration. The case involved revision under Section 263 regarding disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for trade discounts given to distributors. The PCIT exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 finding the assessment order erroneous as it lacked discussion on the issue. The assessee argued discounts were principal-to-principal transactions not subject to Section 194H. The HC upheld PCIT's jurisdiction under Section 263, rejected the assessee's contention that AO had accepted their position without discussion, and directed the Tribunal to examine the substantive merits rather than merely procedural aspects. en-us Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Jun 2025 08:43:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772544 Karnataka HC set aside the Tribunal's order and remanded the matter for merit consideration. The case involved revision under Section 263 regarding disallowance under Section 40(a)(ia) for trade discounts given to distributors. The PCIT exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 finding the assessment order erroneous as it lacked discussion on the issue. The assessee argued discounts were principal-to-principal transactions not subject to Section 194H. The HC upheld PCIT's jurisdiction under Section 263, rejected the assessee's contention that AO had accepted their position without discussion, and directed the Tribunal to examine the substantive merits rather than merely procedural aspects. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 05 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772544