https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449006 The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the CIT's revision order under section 263, dismissing the assessee's appeal. The CIT found that the AO had wrongly allowed capital gains exemption under section 54B without conducting basic inquiry into whether the land was used for agricultural purposes for two years preceding the transfer. The assessee's counsel admitted that neither the AO made proper inquiry nor did the assessee provide supporting documents to establish agricultural use. The ITAT confirmed the CIT's finding that the AO's order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. en-us Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Feb 2024 08:25:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449006 The ITAT Ahmedabad upheld the CIT's revision order under section 263, dismissing the assessee's appeal. The CIT found that the AO had wrongly allowed capital gains exemption under section 54B without conducting basic inquiry into whether the land was used for agricultural purposes for two years preceding the transfer. The assessee's counsel admitted that neither the AO made proper inquiry nor did the assessee provide supporting documents to establish agricultural use. The ITAT confirmed the CIT's finding that the AO's order was erroneous and prejudicial to revenue interests. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 31 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449006