https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469935 Section 263 revision could not be sustained where the Assessing Officer had examined the short-term capital loss claim, called for details, considered the assessee's reply, and accepted the claim after enquiry in both original and reassessment proceedings. As no defect, lack of enquiry, or demonstrable error was identified in the assessment order, the Principal Commissioner could not invoke revision merely because a different view on the merits was possible. An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue when it reflects one of the permissible views taken after due enquiry. The revisionary order was quashed in favour of the assessee. en-us Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2026 20:20:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469935 Section 263 revision could not be sustained where the Assessing Officer had examined the short-term capital loss claim, called for details, considered the assessee's reply, and accepted the claim after enquiry in both original and reassessment proceedings. As no defect, lack of enquiry, or demonstrable error was identified in the assessment order, the Principal Commissioner could not invoke revision merely because a different view on the merits was possible. An assessment order is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue when it reflects one of the permissible views taken after due enquiry. The revisionary order was quashed in favour of the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 11 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469935