Assessing Officer reopened assessment on ground that assessee had made certain cash deposits in its bank account which were not explained and reconciled in its books of account. The Assessing Officer passed an order without making  any addition with respect to cash deposits.  Commissioner invoked revision under section 263 on ground that Assessing Officer failed to carry out necessary verification on two issues, viz., share capital/premium and unsecured loans received by assessee. On appeal the Tribunal held that  when Assessing Officer had not made any addition with respect to cash deposits made in bank account of assessee, i.e. issue, based on which, its case was reopened by him under section 147, Assessing Officer was divested of his jurisdiction from making any further independent addition /disallowance. Therefore, Pr. Commissioner could not have held re-assessment order so passed as erroneous for reason that he had failed to carry out verification on such independent issues viz. share capital/premium and unsecured loans received by assessee which were not subject matter of reassessment proceedings.  Tribunal also held that where subject matter of re-assessment is distinct and different from issues regarding which revision jurisdiction under section 263 has been invoked, then in that case relevant date for purpose of determination of period of limitation for exercising powers under section 263 would be date of original assessment order and not date of reassessment order. (AY. 2014-15)