https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419986 Section 263 revision was not justified where the Assessing Officer had examined the assessee's capital-gains working, sale and purchase deeds, bank statements and related material before accepting long-term capital gain. The record showed scrutiny assessment with application of mind to the relevant facts, and the absence of an elaborate discussion did not mean there was no inquiry or verification. The consistency of treating receipts from the same plots as long-term capital gain in the preceding year also supported the assessment view. On these facts, the condition in Explanation 2 to section 263(1) was not met, so the revisional order could not be sustained and the assessment stood restored. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 24 Mar 2022 09:22:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419986 Section 263 revision was not justified where the Assessing Officer had examined the assessee's capital-gains working, sale and purchase deeds, bank statements and related material before accepting long-term capital gain. The record showed scrutiny assessment with application of mind to the relevant facts, and the absence of an elaborate discussion did not mean there was no inquiry or verification. The consistency of treating receipts from the same plots as long-term capital gain in the preceding year also supported the assessment view. On these facts, the condition in Explanation 2 to section 263(1) was not met, so the revisional order could not be sustained and the assessment stood restored. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 09 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=419986