Sec. 45(2) & 263 of Income-tax Act, 1961 — Revision —  Assessee filed appeal against the revision order of Principal CIT on the grounds that CIT grossly erred in holding that the assessment order of learned AO is erroneous and prejudiced to the interest of Revenue on the ground that profit on sale of ancestral property has to be taxed under the head income from business instead of capital gain, after computing capital gain under s. 45(2) of the IT Act, 1961 on conversion of capital assets into “stock-in-trade” and; revisionary jurisdiction cannot be allowed to be exercised by the CIT either for substituting his own opinion for that of the AO or for making a fishing or roving enquiry. ITAT allowed the appeal of the assesse holding that:- for exercising the power under s. 263 of the Act, the CIT has to satisfy itself that the order passed by the AO is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Without satisfaction of the twin conditions that the order passed by the AO is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, the provisions of s. 263 can't be invoked. Therefore, in the case in hand, when there will be no revenue loss even if provisions of s. 45(2) are applied then in such a situation the CIT is not allowed to exercise its power under s. 263 of the Act merely because the AO has accepted the capital gains declared by the assessee — LATE SHRI RAMAVTAR GUPTA Vs. PR. CIT [2020] 203 TTJ 643 (ITAT-JAIPUR)