<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (10) TMI 426 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800483</link>
    <description>Revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked over cash deposits merely because the Principal Commissioner adopts a different view after assessment. Where the Assessing Officer examined the deposits in detail during assessment, the assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on that issue. Revision is therefore impermissible where the existing assessment record establishes adequate inquiry.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928302" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 426 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800483</link>
      <description>Revisionary jurisdiction cannot be invoked over cash deposits merely because the Principal Commissioner adopts a different view after assessment. Where the Assessing Officer examined the deposits in detail during assessment, the assessment order is not erroneous or prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue on that issue. Revision is therefore impermissible where the existing assessment record establishes adequate inquiry.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800483</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>