https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56214 Section 263 revision is valid only against a communicated and effective assessment order, and cannot be sustained where some assessments were never communicated to the assessees. Revisional action must also rest on the record existing at the time of assessment; material gathered through subsequent enquiries cannot be used to found the jurisdiction. On the merits, capital gains exemption under section 54E could not be denied on the Commissioner's artificial distinction about ownership and investment, where the materials supported the assessees' claim and the property could be treated as part of the family hotchpotch. The revisional orders were therefore unsustainable on both jurisdictional and substantive grounds. en-us Mon, 13 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 02 Dec 2010 13:27:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56214 Section 263 revision is valid only against a communicated and effective assessment order, and cannot be sustained where some assessments were never communicated to the assessees. Revisional action must also rest on the record existing at the time of assessment; material gathered through subsequent enquiries cannot be used to found the jurisdiction. On the merits, capital gains exemption under section 54E could not be denied on the Commissioner's artificial distinction about ownership and investment, where the materials supported the assessees' claim and the property could be treated as part of the family hotchpotch. The revisional orders were therefore unsustainable on both jurisdictional and substantive grounds. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Jun 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=56214