https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17632 A prior binding decision on the same assessee's case was treated as controlling, so directions issued under section 144B(4) were regarded as having no continuing effect after the assessment was set aside under section 263. The court also applied the same precedent to hold that section 144B(7) did not protect the assessee on a jurisdictional change occurring otherwise than under sections 125 and 125A. On the factual findings, the Tribunal's view that standing trees formed part of the purchase price, with no perversity in the evidence, was accepted, supporting capital gains liability on their sale and sustaining the assessment. en-us Wed, 10 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:38:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17632 A prior binding decision on the same assessee's case was treated as controlling, so directions issued under section 144B(4) were regarded as having no continuing effect after the assessment was set aside under section 263. The court also applied the same precedent to hold that section 144B(7) did not protect the assessee on a jurisdictional change occurring otherwise than under sections 125 and 125A. On the factual findings, the Tribunal's view that standing trees formed part of the purchase price, with no perversity in the evidence, was accepted, supporting capital gains liability on their sale and sustaining the assessment. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 10 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=17632