https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392657 The Court upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax's decision under Section 263, emphasizing the importance of a thorough examination and application of mind by the Assessing Officer to avoid erroneous orders prejudicial to revenue. The case involved scrutiny of long term capital gain on shares, with the Court finding the original assessment order to be erroneous due to inadequate examination, justifying the PCIT's exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263. The addition of Explanation 2 to Section 263 by the Finance Act, 2015, further supported the dismissal of the appeal. en-us Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 07:05:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392657 The Court upheld the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax's decision under Section 263, emphasizing the importance of a thorough examination and application of mind by the Assessing Officer to avoid erroneous orders prejudicial to revenue. The case involved scrutiny of long term capital gain on shares, with the Court finding the original assessment order to be erroneous due to inadequate examination, justifying the PCIT's exercise of jurisdiction under Section 263. The addition of Explanation 2 to Section 263 by the Finance Act, 2015, further supported the dismissal of the appeal. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392657