https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777731 ITAT held the revision under s.263 unsustainable and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal found AO had called for and considered explanations and documents, accepted a plausible view on returned income, and applied his mind; mere lack of further verification or a different manner of verification did not render the AO's order erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. Capital introductions by partners, ledger extracts, bank statements, expense proofs and asset details were on record and tested; CIT was not justified in substituting his view for the AO's bona fide assessment. en-us Tue, 12 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 08:40:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777731 ITAT held the revision under s.263 unsustainable and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. The Tribunal found AO had called for and considered explanations and documents, accepted a plausible view on returned income, and applied his mind; mere lack of further verification or a different manner of verification did not render the AO's order erroneous or prejudicial to revenue. Capital introductions by partners, ledger extracts, bank statements, expense proofs and asset details were on record and tested; CIT was not justified in substituting his view for the AO's bona fide assessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 12 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777731