Held that the Assessing Officer had not examined whether the sale was a slump sale under Section 50B or taxable under Section 50 as short-term capital gains. Since the assessment order did not address the issue with reference to competing provisions, exercise of power under Section 263 was justified. (AY. 2016-17)
Sterling Farm Research and Services (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2026) 308 Taxman 121 (Kerala)(HC)
S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Slump sale-assessment order did not address the issue with reference to competing provisions; exercise of power under Section 263 was justified.[S.45, 50B]
Leave a Reply