https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255364 Revision under section 263 was upheld because the rental receipt from the godown did not satisfy the statutory conditions for agricultural income under section 2(1A)(c). The Assessing Officer had accepted the claim without recording reasons showing how the building ownership, occupation, and other mandatory provisos were met, so the assessment order was treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The assessee's alternative grounds were not examined by the Commissioner and were remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. en-us Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 15 Jan 2015 11:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255364 Revision under section 263 was upheld because the rental receipt from the godown did not satisfy the statutory conditions for agricultural income under section 2(1A)(c). The Assessing Officer had accepted the claim without recording reasons showing how the building ownership, occupation, and other mandatory provisos were met, so the assessment order was treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. The assessee's alternative grounds were not examined by the Commissioner and were remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 31 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255364