2020 (11) TMI 215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t] directing the Assessing Officer to redo the assessment after verification into the computation of capital gains and the exemption under section 54 of the Act. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2014-15 on 30.08.2014 admitting an income of Rs.  15,29,430/-. The return filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and against the statutory notices, the assessee furnished the details. On verification of the details filed by the assessee, the Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act by assessing long term capital loss at Rs.  NIL. 3. By invoking the provision of section 263 of the Act, the ld. PCIT was of the opinion that the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....capital loss of Rs.  7,55,429/- has been claimed in respect of sale of landed property at Yercaud. But, on examination of the working of the capital gain/loss, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee has wrongly computed the indexed cost of improvement with respect to the property. On bringing the above fact to the notice of the assessee, a revised computation has been furnished by the assessee and accordingly, the long term capital loss was reduced to NIL and held that the assessee shall not be eligible to carry forward any long term capital loss. 5.1 While invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Act and on perusal of the sale deed furnished during the assessment proceedings, the ld. PCIT has noticed that the constru....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....etting aside the assessment order, the Assessing Officer was directed to redo the assessment after carrying out verification into the computation of capital gains and the exemption claimed under section 54 of the Act. 5.3 On perusal of the revision order passed under section 263 of the Act, we find that the ld. PCIT has not given any specific findings as to what is erroneous in the assessment order and what is required to be verified by the Assessing Officer. On perusal of the assessment order, we find that after examining the working of the capital gain/loss, the Assessing Officer has observed that the assessee has wrongly computed the indexed cost of improvement with respect to the property and accordingly, after revision of the comput....