https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215704 Section 263 revision was held unsustainable on the long-term capital gains issue because the Assessing Officer had examined the material in assessment and adopted a permissible view, making the case one of change of opinion rather than lack of enquiry or an error prejudicial to the Revenue. On the excess deduction under section 80C, the assessment was found erroneous in law and the existence of rectification proceedings did not bar revisional action, so revision was upheld on that distinct issue. The appeal was therefore allowed only in part, with relief confined to the capital gains component. en-us Fri, 15 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 13:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215704 Section 263 revision was held unsustainable on the long-term capital gains issue because the Assessing Officer had examined the material in assessment and adopted a permissible view, making the case one of change of opinion rather than lack of enquiry or an error prejudicial to the Revenue. On the excess deduction under section 80C, the assessment was found erroneous in law and the existence of rectification proceedings did not bar revisional action, so revision was upheld on that distinct issue. The appeal was therefore allowed only in part, with relief confined to the capital gains component. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 15 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=215704