Allowing the appeal of the assessee the Tribunal held that , revision on account of change of opinion was held to be not valid . Investment in the name of wife was held to be entitle to exemption .The word used are the assessee has to invest , it is not specified that it is to be in the name of assessee. Expenditure on bore wells and stamp duty to be taken in to consideration while considering the exemption u/s 54B.( AY.2008 -09)
Laxmi Narayan v. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 117/( 2019) 306 CTR 361 (Raj) (HC) Shravan lal Meena L/H of Late Bhagwanta Meena v.ITO (2018) 402 ITR 117/( 2019) 306 CTR 361 (Raj) (HC) Mahadev Balaji v .ITO (2018) 402 ITR 117/( 2019) 306 CTR 361 (Raj) (HC)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –Mere change of opinion revision was held to be not valid. [ S. 54B ]
GOOD