<?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>PCIT&#039;s Revision Under Section 263 Quashed for Misuse of Power and Incorrect Disallowance of Depreciation Claims</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90891</link>
    <description>The ITAT held that the revisionary order passed by the PCIT under section 263 was unsustainable. The PCIT failed to make a conclusive finding that the additional depreciation claims on certain assets were wrongly allowed, and improperly directed the AO to disallow these claims without verification. The finding of erroneous depreciation on the residential building was flawed, as it disregarded binding judicial precedents favorable to the assessee. Regarding disallowance under section 14A, the PCIT usurped the AO&#039;s exclusive jurisdiction to record dissatisfaction with the assessee&#039;s explanation and could not direct disallowance under Rule 8D. The PCIT&#039;s attempt to reduce the written down value by carried forward additional depreciation before.....</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:16 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=838581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>PCIT&#039;s Revision Under Section 263 Quashed for Misuse of Power and Incorrect Disallowance of Depreciation Claims</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90891</link>
      <description>The ITAT held that the revisionary order passed by the PCIT under section 263 was unsustainable. The PCIT failed to make a conclusive finding that the additional depreciation claims on certain assets were wrongly allowed, and improperly directed the AO to disallow these claims without verification. The finding of erroneous depreciation on the residential building was flawed, as it disregarded binding judicial precedents favorable to the assessee. Regarding disallowance under section 14A, the PCIT usurped the AO&#039;s exclusive jurisdiction to record dissatisfaction with the assessee&#039;s explanation and could not direct disallowance under Rule 8D. The PCIT&#039;s attempt to reduce the written down value by carried forward additional depreciation before.....</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:16 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90891</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>