https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778543 ITAT JAIPUR set aside the CIT's revision under s.263, holding the revision unsustainable because the AO had examined acquisition cost within the limited scrutiny scope and the CIT impermissibly sought to expand that scope without invoking applicable clauses of Explanation 2. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s finding that indexation of purchase cost is determined from the allotment date (03.12.1999) not registration, and found no infirmity in that conclusion, thereby quashing the s.263 order as prejudicially unsupported. en-us Mon, 15 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Sep 2025 08:30:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778543 ITAT JAIPUR set aside the CIT's revision under s.263, holding the revision unsustainable because the AO had examined acquisition cost within the limited scrutiny scope and the CIT impermissibly sought to expand that scope without invoking applicable clauses of Explanation 2. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s finding that indexation of purchase cost is determined from the allotment date (03.12.1999) not registration, and found no infirmity in that conclusion, thereby quashing the s.263 order as prejudicially unsupported. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 15 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778543