https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780062 ITAT, Patna held that the PCIT's exercise of jurisdiction under s.263 was unwarranted because the AO had conducted inquiries, called for and recorded evidence (contract notes, ledger entries, bank statements) regarding long-term capital gains claimed u/s 10(38). The Tribunal found the PCIT's conclusion of no or inadequate inquiry contrary to assessment records and ruled that where the AO has examined the matter and two reasonable views exist, s.263 cannot be invoked to substitute the AO's view. Appeal allowed; reassessment set aside. en-us Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Oct 2025 08:08:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780062 ITAT, Patna held that the PCIT's exercise of jurisdiction under s.263 was unwarranted because the AO had conducted inquiries, called for and recorded evidence (contract notes, ledger entries, bank statements) regarding long-term capital gains claimed u/s 10(38). The Tribunal found the PCIT's conclusion of no or inadequate inquiry contrary to assessment records and ruled that where the AO has examined the matter and two reasonable views exist, s.263 cannot be invoked to substitute the AO's view. Appeal allowed; reassessment set aside. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 15 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780062