https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89532 HC held that CIT's revision under Section 263 was unwarranted. The revenue failed to demonstrate prejudice to its interests when challenging the AO's assessment. The attempt to reclassify the assessee's status from partnership firm to AOP was erroneous, particularly regarding the partner count. The court rejected CIT's contention about partner calculation and found no substantive tax differential between the two assessment approaches. The court emphasized that mere technical variations do not justify reassessment, and the original assessment order remained valid. The appeal was ultimately decided in favor of the assessee, with the HC affirming the existing assessment order. en-us Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:26 +0530 Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89532 HC held that CIT's revision under Section 263 was unwarranted. The revenue failed to demonstrate prejudice to its interests when challenging the AO's assessment. The attempt to reclassify the assessee's status from partnership firm to AOP was erroneous, particularly regarding the partner count. The court rejected CIT's contention about partner calculation and found no substantive tax differential between the two assessment approaches. The court emphasized that mere technical variations do not justify reassessment, and the original assessment order remained valid. The appeal was ultimately decided in favor of the assessee, with the HC affirming the existing assessment order. Highlights Income Tax Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:04:26 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=89532