https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339480 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order of the Ld. Principal CIT and restoring the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the claims made by the assessee were in line with the Capital Gains Accounts Scheme 1988 and the lack of proof for land acquisition expenses did not warrant invoking section 263. The decision highlighted the necessity for orders to be both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue for section 263 to apply, emphasizing adherence to legal provisions and proper assessment procedures. en-us Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Feb 2017 11:42:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339480 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order of the Ld. Principal CIT and restoring the assessment made by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal found that the claims made by the assessee were in line with the Capital Gains Accounts Scheme 1988 and the lack of proof for land acquisition expenses did not warrant invoking section 263. The decision highlighted the necessity for orders to be both erroneous and prejudicial to revenue for section 263 to apply, emphasizing adherence to legal provisions and proper assessment procedures. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Feb 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339480