S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Capital gains not chargeable – Investment in Bonds – Amendment to S. 54EC from 1-4-2015 restricting investment in assets from sale consideration on sale of original asset to Rs. 50 lakhs prospective nature- Revision is held to be bad in law . [S.45 , 54EC ]

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal – Duties- Adducing additional evidence – assessee filed additional evidence – Tribunal passed order without dealing with application to file additional evidence – order set aside – Matter remanded – Tribunal directed to first dispose the application for additional evidence and then pass order on merits for the appeal.[S.260A, ITAT R. 29 ]

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Doctrine of merger – CIT(A) dismissed appeal as being infructuous basis notice issued u/s 263 by CIT on grounds unrelated to that before CIT(A) – CIT(A) ought to have adjudicated appeal on merits hence matter remanded back to CIT(A).[ S.263 ]

S. 249: Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Form of appeal and limitation – Appeal could not be dismissed on a technical ground of not filing the same electronically.[ S.251 ]

S. 194H: : Deduction at source – Commission or brokerage –
Nationalized Bank – Service charges paid for routing transactions to National Financial Switch and Cash Tree- Not be liable to deduct tax at source .[S.40(a)(ia)]

S. 194A : Deduction at source – Interest other than interest on securities – No liability to deduct tax based on the specific exclusion provided to the assessee under section 194A(3)(v) – Provisions would not apply [S. 40(a)(ia), 194A(3)(i)(b) , 194A(3)(v)]

S. 153C: Assessment – Income of any other person – Search
The materials seized did not indicate any inflation of purchase expenses- Assessment is held to be bad in law. [S.12AA, 132 ]

S. 153A : Assessment – Search or requisition – Objections raised by the Assessee – Rejected with reasons – No violation of Principles of Natural Justice.[ Art . 226 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment – Within four years – High Court directed AO to re-look at the matter in light of the declaratory and curative amendment in 40(a)(ia) being retrospective from 1-4-2005 [S. 40(a)(ia), 148 , 194C, Art , 226 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- No failure to disclose any tangible material – Reassessment is held to be bad in law .[S. 40(b)(ia) , 148]