https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456237 The ITAT Delhi quashed a revision order passed by the PCIT under section 263. The PCIT had claimed the AO failed to examine the assessee's section 54B deduction claim, making the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. However, the ITAT found that during reassessment proceedings, the AO had issued specific notices under section 142(1) inquiring about property purchases and capital gains. The assessee provided complete details and claimed section 54B deduction, which the AO accepted after adequate inquiry. Relying on Malabar Industrial Company Ltd., the ITAT held that adequate enquiries were conducted, making the revision jurisdiction inappropriate. The assessee's appeal was allowed. en-us Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jul 2024 08:56:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456237 The ITAT Delhi quashed a revision order passed by the PCIT under section 263. The PCIT had claimed the AO failed to examine the assessee's section 54B deduction claim, making the assessment erroneous and prejudicial to revenue. However, the ITAT found that during reassessment proceedings, the AO had issued specific notices under section 142(1) inquiring about property purchases and capital gains. The assessee provided complete details and claimed section 54B deduction, which the AO accepted after adequate inquiry. Relying on Malabar Industrial Company Ltd., the ITAT held that adequate enquiries were conducted, making the revision jurisdiction inappropriate. The assessee's appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456237