Assessee filed its returns in response to the notice issued under section 153 and the assessment was completed under section 153A, read with section 143(3)of the Act.  Subsequently, Principal Commissioner initiated proceedings under section 263 and passed an order directing Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order.  In compliance with said order of the Principal Commissioner, a new assessment order was passed under section 143(3) read with section 263 of the Act.  Principal Commissioner again initiated revision proceedings for the second time by again cancelling the non-existent first assessment order and further directed Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order.   The second assessment order was never cancelled and as such remained valid.  Since the assessee’s income was scrutinized and examined twice i.e. in the original proceedings and the second assessment order passed after 263 order, thus, the order passed by the Principal Commissioner in the second round of revision directing the Assessing Officer to scrutinize the accounts of the assessee for the third time was not permissible in law.  Dismissing the appeal of the Revenue the Court held that the third assessment order passed pursuant to the second order under section 263 passed by the Principal Commissioner had no legal effect hence bad in law. Order of Tribunal affirmed. (AY. 2012-13)