https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386961 The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as they were initiated on the same issue already covered by the High Court's judgment in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 54B for investment in agricultural land in the name of his wife, following the precedent allowing such exemptions. The Tribunal found the source of investment adequately explained and supported by evidence. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the cash transaction provisions were not applicable for the relevant assessment year and that an audit objection alone does not justify revision under Section 263. The original reassessment order was upheld, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. en-us Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:42:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386961 The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings were invalid as they were initiated on the same issue already covered by the High Court's judgment in favor of the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for exemption under Section 54B for investment in agricultural land in the name of his wife, following the precedent allowing such exemptions. The Tribunal found the source of investment adequately explained and supported by evidence. Additionally, the Tribunal ruled that the cash transaction provisions were not applicable for the relevant assessment year and that an audit objection alone does not justify revision under Section 263. The original reassessment order was upheld, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 10 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386961