https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470105 Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Principal Commissioner considers the Assessing Officer's inquiries inadequate or prefers another view. Where the assessment record contains specific queries, replies and supporting evidence regarding security deposits, finance-lease obligations, trade payables, borrowings and interest expenditure, and the Assessing Officer adopts a plausible view, revision requires identification of a specific error. Explanation 2 does not displace the requirement that the assessment order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. As neither condition was established, the revision order was invalid and stood quashed. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jul 2026 18:59:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470105 Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 cannot be invoked merely because the Principal Commissioner considers the Assessing Officer's inquiries inadequate or prefers another view. Where the assessment record contains specific queries, replies and supporting evidence regarding security deposits, finance-lease obligations, trade payables, borrowings and interest expenditure, and the Assessing Officer adopts a plausible view, revision requires identification of a specific error. Explanation 2 does not displace the requirement that the assessment order must be both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue. As neither condition was established, the revision order was invalid and stood quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470105