https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376060 The Tribunal held that the CIT's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was not justified as the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal found discrepancies pointed out by the CIT in the purchase value of shares and the computation of closing balance of sundry debtors to be unfounded. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the assessee's classification of income from the sale of investments as capital gains, not business income. The appeal was allowed, and the assessment order was upheld, emphasizing the importance of proper consideration of explanations before revising an assessment order. en-us Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Mar 2019 18:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376060 The Tribunal held that the CIT's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 263 was not justified as the assessment order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. The Tribunal found discrepancies pointed out by the CIT in the purchase value of shares and the computation of closing balance of sundry debtors to be unfounded. Additionally, the Tribunal upheld the assessee's classification of income from the sale of investments as capital gains, not business income. The appeal was allowed, and the assessment order was upheld, emphasizing the importance of proper consideration of explanations before revising an assessment order. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376060