https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466125 Revision jurisdiction under section 263 requires an erroneous order based on incorrect assumption of fact or law; where such incorrectness exists the order may be prejudicial to the interest of revenue, and revision is permissible, but mere loss of revenue or disagreement with a permissible view of the Assessing Officer does not suffice. If the AO adopts one of two or more legally permissible views the revisional authority cannot substitute its own view unless the AO's view is totally unsustainable in law; applying these principles the revisional order was found not erroneous and the assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 25 Jan 2026 21:24:30 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466125 Revision jurisdiction under section 263 requires an erroneous order based on incorrect assumption of fact or law; where such incorrectness exists the order may be prejudicial to the interest of revenue, and revision is permissible, but mere loss of revenue or disagreement with a permissible view of the Assessing Officer does not suffice. If the AO adopts one of two or more legally permissible views the revisional authority cannot substitute its own view unless the AO's view is totally unsustainable in law; applying these principles the revisional order was found not erroneous and the assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466125