S. 272A : Penalty-Failure to answer questions-Sign statements-Furnish information-Order of High Court was stayed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 30.05.2025-Subsequently revenue had issued a notice for penalty under section 272A-Since order of High Court was already stayed by Supreme Court, penalty notice was also to be stayed.[S.68, Art, 136]

S. 271(1)(c): Penalty-Concealment-Failure to specify the charge-No specific limb was struck off-The Tribunal was justified in deleting the penalty.[S.68, 260A, 274]

S. 268A : Appeal-Instructions-Circulars-Monetary limits-Income from other sources-Deductions-Tax effect was below the monetary threshold limit of Rs. 2 crores as per CBDT Circular No. 9 of 2024, dated 17-9-2024, appeal was to be dismissed for low tax effect. [S.56, 57(iii), 260A]

S. 264: Commissioner-Revision of other orders-82-year-old woman-Order passed by the Commissioner rejecting the application was set aside and remanded to the Commissioner to re-examine the assessment of the assessee and pass appropriate orders. [S. 139, Art.226]

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Carry forward and set off of accumulated loss and unabsorbed depreciation-Amalgamation-Demerger-There was no error per se in the order of assessment, and the direction under the order of revision amounted to a mere roving enquiry and the same was set aside.[S.2(19AA), 2(IB), 72A(2), 72A(4)]

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]

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Amalgamation-Depreciation-Demerger-Goodwill-Difference between net assets and shares to be issued credited as goodwill and depreciation allowed-Scrutiny assessment-Order of Tribunal setting aside revision order was affirmed by High Court-SLP delay of 658 days-SLP dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits. [S.43(6), Art. 136]

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Limitation of six months for filing a rectification application would commence from the date of communication of the order and not the date of the order itself. [S. 254(1),254(3), ITAT R. 1963, R. 9, 34A, Art. 226]

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Once the Tribunal had partly allowed the appeal by order dated 21-9-2011 and had directed adoption of 5 per cent profit ratio by modifying the assessment order, the Tribunal was not within its power to re-adjudicate issues and determine estimated income in the hands of the assessee afresh.[S. 254(1), 260A]

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Interest on borrowed capital-Lease rent-Tribunal remanded disallowance without recording findings on business purpose and diversion of borrowed funds-Remand order passed by Tribunal liable to be set aside for fresh adjudication-Any sum received from employees-Tribunal, despite recording admitted delay in payment of employees’ contribution, remanded issue without recording reasons as to allowability, impugned remand order was unsustainable and liable to be set aside for fresh adjudication. [S. 36(1)(iii), 36(1)(va), 260A]