https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470602 Revision under section 263 was valid because the Assessing Officer made no specific inquiry or verification into a material deduction claimed as "any other amount as deduction" or the applicability of dividend-stripping provisions, despite complete scrutiny selection. Explanation 2(a) deems an assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue where required inquiries or verification were not undertaken. The distinction between complete absence of inquiry and inadequate inquiry was decisive: authorities involving some inquiry, or relating to periods before Explanation 2(a), did not apply. The assessment order was therefore erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. en-us Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Jul 2026 19:03:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470602 Revision under section 263 was valid because the Assessing Officer made no specific inquiry or verification into a material deduction claimed as "any other amount as deduction" or the applicability of dividend-stripping provisions, despite complete scrutiny selection. Explanation 2(a) deems an assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue where required inquiries or verification were not undertaken. The distinction between complete absence of inquiry and inadequate inquiry was decisive: authorities involving some inquiry, or relating to periods before Explanation 2(a), did not apply. The assessment order was therefore erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of Revenue. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470602