Assessee-company, engaged in manufacture and export of garments, sold its land to discharge encumbrances from sale proceeds to pay off its shareholders under dispute. It claimed  encumbrance charges as cost of improvement while computing long-term capital gains and same was accepted by Assessing Officer.  Commissioner  passed the revision order and set aside assessment order on ground that assessee’s claim of expenses were wrongly allowed as deduction since they did not qualify as capital expenditure nor did they result in any enduring improvement to value of capital asset. The Commissioner also held that  the  assessee did not make payments to remove encumbrances as claimed and neither was there compliance with sections 50A and 55(1)(b) while passing of assessment order.  Tribunal and High Court set aside order of Commissioner.  Supreme Court  held that order passed by Assessing Officer was erroneous as well as prejudicial to interest of revenue and thus it could not be said that Commissioner exercised jurisdiction under section 263 not vested in it.  High Court committed a very serious error in setting aside order passed by Commissioner in exercise of powers under section 263 and, thus, order of Commissioner was   restored Assessee filed review petition the Court held that there being no apparent error in order warranting its reconsideration, review petition was to be dismissed. (AY. 2007-08)