https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294569 Delay in filing the appeals was condoned because the explanation showed bona fide professional advice, supported by affidavit, and a genuine misunderstanding; the liberal test for sufficient cause was satisfied, so the appeals were admitted. On the merits, revision under section 263 failed because the Assessing Officer had adopted one of the possible views on the year of chargeability of capital gains, based on the record and the timing of transfer. An assessment is revisable only if it is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, and a plausible view cannot be treated as erroneous. As the same transaction had already been taxed in later assessment years, prejudice was not established and the revisional orders were quashed. en-us Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Apr 2021 09:45:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294569 Delay in filing the appeals was condoned because the explanation showed bona fide professional advice, supported by affidavit, and a genuine misunderstanding; the liberal test for sufficient cause was satisfied, so the appeals were admitted. On the merits, revision under section 263 failed because the Assessing Officer had adopted one of the possible views on the year of chargeability of capital gains, based on the record and the timing of transfer. An assessment is revisable only if it is both erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, and a plausible view cannot be treated as erroneous. As the same transaction had already been taxed in later assessment years, prejudice was not established and the revisional orders were quashed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 28 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294569