https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779550 ITAT held the section 263 notice void ab initio and allowed the appeal. The Tribunal found that the AO had issued multiple s.142(1) notices and the assessee furnished sufficient evidence supporting carry-forward losses on sale of shares and claim of LTCG exemption under the applicable DTAA. Relying on Malabar Industrial Co., the Tribunal observed that jurisdiction under s.263 requires an order both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue; absence of prejudice (or error) precludes s.263 exercise, so revision could not be sustained. en-us Sat, 16 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Oct 2025 08:45:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779550 ITAT held the section 263 notice void ab initio and allowed the appeal. The Tribunal found that the AO had issued multiple s.142(1) notices and the assessee furnished sufficient evidence supporting carry-forward losses on sale of shares and claim of LTCG exemption under the applicable DTAA. Relying on Malabar Industrial Co., the Tribunal observed that jurisdiction under s.263 requires an order both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue; absence of prejudice (or error) precludes s.263 exercise, so revision could not be sustained. Case-Laws Income Tax Sat, 16 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779550