S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Lack of enquiry-Acceptance in subsequent year cannot hold water as assessment order of year under consideration is to tested on the parameter of ingredients of s. 263-Order u/s. 263 upheld [S. 142(1), 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Invalid re-assessment or void assessment proceedings-Long term capital gain-Order of revision is bad in law [S. 45, 143(3), 147, 148]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Loss on sale of shares-capital loss or speculation loss-Revision justified-Block of assets-Depreciation-Project kept ready to use-Revision is not justified. [S. 32, 43(5)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Carry forward of long term capital loss-Exempt income-Revision order was quashed. [S. 10(38), 74 (1)(b), 74(1)(c)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Buyback transactions-Deemed dividend-Reduction of share capital-Non application of mind-DTAA-India-Singapore-Revision order is up held. [S. 2(22) (d), 45, 92CA(3), 115O, 144C, 160, 163]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Agricultural land-Assessing Officer accepting valuation report furnished by assessee-Failure to follow mandatory provisions of law-Revision is justified. [S. 50C, 56(2)(vii) (b)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Mismatch of disclosure of receipts-Income-Tax Return and Form 26AS-Assessee duly filing reply with necessary evidence-Assessing Officer sending proposal to Principal Commissioner on same issue-Amounts to miscarriage of justice-Revision order was quashed. [S. 154, Form, 26AS.]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Obvious omissions-Late payment of employees Provident Fund-Revision is justified. [S 43B]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Short-Term capital gains-Sale of land, building and furniture-When capital gains calculated separately in manner directed by Principal Commissioner, result would be short-term capital Loss-Revision is not valid. [S. 143(3).

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer framing assessment after considering all details-Revision order not mentioning how Assessing Officer’s order erroneous and prejudicial to interests of Revenue-Revision is not valid [S. 143(3)]