{"id":62583,"date":"2026-07-22T20:06:23","date_gmt":"2026-07-22T14:36:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vaneet-gupta-v-ito-2025-128-itr-352-chd-trib\/"},"modified":"2026-07-22T20:06:23","modified_gmt":"2026-07-22T14:36:23","slug":"vaneet-gupta-v-ito-2025-128-itr-352-chd-trib","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/vaneet-gupta-v-ito-2025-128-itr-352-chd-trib\/","title":{"rendered":"Vaneet Gupta v. ITO (2025) 128 ITR 352 (Chd.)(Trib.)."},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Principal Commissioner invoked section 263 on the basis of an audit objection relating to deposits in an ICICI Bank account, although the issue had been specifically examined by the Assessing Officer during reassessment and an annotated report rejecting the audit objection formed part of the assessment record. After the Tribunal set aside the earlier revision order, the Principal Commissioner issued a fresh notice introducing altogether new issues beyond the original notice and beyond the period of limitation. The Tribunal held that revision merely on the basis of an audit objection was impermissible where the Assessing Officer had already made due enquiries and taken a conscious view. Further, new issues could not be introduced beyond the prescribed limitation. The revision order was quashed both on legal grounds and on merits. (AY. 2011-12)\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Issue already examined during assessment -Proceedings initiated on basis of audit objection -Fresh issues beyond limitation -Revision invalid on legal and merits.  [S. 143(3), 147, 148] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-62583","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-ghp","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62583","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=62583"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62583\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":62584,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/62583\/revisions\/62584"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=62583"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=62583"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=62583"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}