S. 147: Reassessment -After the expiry of four years -If the AO is of the opinion that the issue requires verification, it tantamounts to fishing or roving inquiry. He is not permitted to reopen merely because in the later year, he took a different view on the basis of similar material-.Even if the question of taxing interest income under the DTAA was not in the mind of the AO when he passed the assessment, he cannot reopen if there is no failure to disclose truly and fully all material facts- Reassessment is held to be not valid-DTAA-India -Cyprus . [ S.148,, Art. 11(2). ]

S. 68: Cash credits- Bogus Capital gains-Penny Stocks-Though the AO did not find any mistake in the documentation furnished by the assessee, there is need for finding of fact on (i) the nature of the shares transactions; (ii) make-believe nature of paper work; (iii) Camouflage the bogus nature; and, (iv) the relevance of human probabilities etc – Addition is confirmed as cash credits [S.10(38) 45]

S.37(1): Business expenditure – Diversion by overriding title -Sharing of profit-The AO has to take into account the manner in which the business works, the modalities and manner in which SAP/additional purchase price/final price are decided and determine what amount forms part of the profit -Whatever is the profit component is sharing of profit/distribution of profit and the rest is deductible as expenditure –question of law is answered partly in favour of the revenue and partly in favour of the assessee- Matter is remitted to the AO to undertake the exercise as stated in the judgement after giving an opportunity to the respective assesses. [ S.40A(2),Sugarcane ( Control) Order 1966 clauses , 3, 5A ]

S. 272A : Penalty — delay in filing statement of tax deducted at source — difficulties in initial stage of change from manual filing to electronic filing of returns – plausible explanation given – Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 200(3), 272A(2)(k), 273B]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue Revision-No specific query was raised by the AO regarding allowability of provision for gratuity and general reserve-Revision is held to be justified. [S. 40A(9)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Delay of 565 days is condoned-Voluntary offer of income in revised return-Dropping of penalty proceedings-Commissioner cannot substitute his view in revision proceedings for assessing officer view for dropping penalty. [S. 254(1), 271(1)(c)]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Cash credits- Share capital- AO had made enquiry by seeking information from Switzerland Tax Authorities through proper channel of FT & TR division of CBDT, for exchange of information so as to verify identity, source of funds and creditworthiness of holding company and its promoters- Revision is held to be not justified. [S. 68]

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal-Additional ground–validity of the assessment can be challenged at any time as it goes to the root of the matter and is a legal issue.

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal—Duties-Additional ground- Validity of assessment is legal in nature–Admitted. [S. 153C]

S. 253 : Appellate Tribunal-Limitation-Delay of 285 days-No material prove bona fides attempts made in filing appeal, mere self-serving documents cannot condoned the huge delay-Appeal was dismissed. [S. 246A]