https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470860 Revision under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because a subsequent Supreme Court ruling adopts a view different from the jurisdictional High Court precedent governing when the assessment was made. Where the Assessing Officer allowed deduction of belated employees' provident fund and ESI contributions in accordance with the then-binding jurisdictional High Court ruling on materially identical facts, the assessment was not erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue interests. The later Supreme Court interpretation did not retrospectively invalidate that assessment for revision purposes, and the revisionary orders were set aside. en-us Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Aug 2026 20:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470860 Revision under Section 263 cannot be invoked merely because a subsequent Supreme Court ruling adopts a view different from the jurisdictional High Court precedent governing when the assessment was made. Where the Assessing Officer allowed deduction of belated employees' provident fund and ESI contributions in accordance with the then-binding jurisdictional High Court ruling on materially identical facts, the assessment was not erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue interests. The later Supreme Court interpretation did not retrospectively invalidate that assessment for revision purposes, and the revisionary orders were set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=470860