Process of revision under section 263 can be initiated only when the CIT calls for and examines the record of any proceeding under the Act and considers that any order passed by the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. On the facts the CIT having initiated the revision proceedings pursuant to the proposal sent by the AO, the revision was quashed on the ground of jurisdictional deficit. (AY. 2012-13)
Alfa Lavel Lund AB v. CIT (IT)(2022) 215 TTJ 814 (Pune)(Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Proposal sent by the Assessing Officer-AO cannot use the power of the CTT and recommend a revision-CIT having passed the order on the basis of the proposal sent by the AO, it is a case of jurisdiction deficit-Order was quashed on legal issue. [S. 143(3), 147, 154]