https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786786 Principal Commissioner's exercise of revision jurisdiction was held invalid because the assessment record shows the assessing officer had issued enquiries, received detailed replies and supporting conveyance deeds, and applied mind to the assessee's claim for a capital-gains deduction; therefore the statutory prerequisites for revisional action were not satisfied and the revision order was quashed, with the assessee's appeals allowed. The decision relies on the principle that revision cannot be invoked where the officer has examined the claim or where two reasonable views are possible; mere disagreement by the revising authority is insufficient. en-us Tue, 17 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Feb 2026 07:58:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786786 Principal Commissioner's exercise of revision jurisdiction was held invalid because the assessment record shows the assessing officer had issued enquiries, received detailed replies and supporting conveyance deeds, and applied mind to the assessee's claim for a capital-gains deduction; therefore the statutory prerequisites for revisional action were not satisfied and the revision order was quashed, with the assessee's appeals allowed. The decision relies on the principle that revision cannot be invoked where the officer has examined the claim or where two reasonable views are possible; mere disagreement by the revising authority is insufficient. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 17 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786786