Tribunal held that the order of the Commissioner was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Assessing Officer to examine whether the assessee was or was not in possession of the property on July 3, 1980. The assessee was also directed to file the relevant documents in support of his contention before the Assessing Officer and thereafter, the matter will be decided by the Assessing Officer as per law. ( AY.2008 -09
Pravinbhai Mafatlal Joshi v. ITO (2018) 61 ITR 775 (Ahd.) (Trib)
S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Capital gains — Cost of acquisition —Tribunal directed the assesse to file relevant documents and directed the AO to decide accordance with law . [ S.45, 48 ]