https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388077 Revision under section 263 of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the assessment, after remand, remained cryptic and did not record a clear finding on the actual commencement and completion of the housing project. The earlier remand required verification of the true commencement of construction, since the approval date alone did not decide eligibility under section 80IB(10). As the Assessing Officer did not show adequate enquiry or proper application of mind, the revisional order was sustained and the challenge failed. en-us Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 07 Nov 2019 08:12:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388077 Revision under section 263 of the Income-tax Act was upheld because the assessment, after remand, remained cryptic and did not record a clear finding on the actual commencement and completion of the housing project. The earlier remand required verification of the true commencement of construction, since the approval date alone did not decide eligibility under section 80IB(10). As the Assessing Officer did not show adequate enquiry or proper application of mind, the revisional order was sustained and the challenge failed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388077