https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788364 Whether revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 was properly invoked to set aside an assessment allowing a donation deduction claimed as 50% of CSR expenditure turns on two issues: legal entitlement to the deduction under donation provisions, and whether the A.O.'s lack of detailed enquiry rendered the order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. Co ordinate decisions and the materials on record permitted determination of the legal question that CSR linked donations were not expressly excluded and thus legally tenable; absence of a fuller enquiry did not make the order erroneous or prejudicial. Result: revision under Section 263 was unjustified and the assessment stands for the deduction claimed. en-us Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Mar 2026 08:35:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788364 Whether revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 was properly invoked to set aside an assessment allowing a donation deduction claimed as 50% of CSR expenditure turns on two issues: legal entitlement to the deduction under donation provisions, and whether the A.O.'s lack of detailed enquiry rendered the order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. Co ordinate decisions and the materials on record permitted determination of the legal question that CSR linked donations were not expressly excluded and thus legally tenable; absence of a fuller enquiry did not make the order erroneous or prejudicial. Result: revision under Section 263 was unjustified and the assessment stands for the deduction claimed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788364