https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301380 The ITAT admitted the appeals filed by the assessees against CIT (A) orders despite a delay of 471 days, condoning the delay due to valid reasons. The CIT (A) was found to have jurisdiction under Section 263 to set aside the assessment order, leading to a review of capital gains issues. However, the ITAT held that the Section 263 proceedings were not sustainable based on precedent, resulting in the automatic revival of the original assessment under Section 143(3). Consequently, all CIT (A) orders were set aside, and appeals were restored for further adjudication. en-us Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Apr 2022 20:30:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301380 The ITAT admitted the appeals filed by the assessees against CIT (A) orders despite a delay of 471 days, condoning the delay due to valid reasons. The CIT (A) was found to have jurisdiction under Section 263 to set aside the assessment order, leading to a review of capital gains issues. However, the ITAT held that the Section 263 proceedings were not sustainable based on precedent, resulting in the automatic revival of the original assessment under Section 143(3). Consequently, all CIT (A) orders were set aside, and appeals were restored for further adjudication. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 01 Jul 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301380