S. 92C : Transfer pricing – Arm’s length price -Comparability Parameters and Application of Filters- Inappropriate filters had been used by asssessee which would lead to an incorrect choice of comparables. DRP passed order excluding three companies from final set of comparables drawn by TPO-Tribunal partly allowed assessee’s appeal, however, upheld inclusion of Thirdware Solutions Limited and exclusion of CG Vak Soft-ware & Exports Ltd. and Quintegra Solutions Ltd. as comparables for benchmarking international transaction under software development services segment- Order of Tribunal is up held .

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- Cancellation of registration on basis of violation of S.13(1)(c ) of the Act is held to be not valid [ S.11, 13(1)( c) ]

S. 10 (23C): Educational institution-Withdrawal of approval- Collection of capitalisation fee- Illegal activities -Rs 52 crores was collected as anonymous donations – Sham or bogus trusts cannot be held to be entitle to exemption . [ S.10(23C) (vi) ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –Limitation – If the authority issuing the show-cause notice lacks jurisdiction and if the notice is clearly barred by law , writ is maintainable- Notice issued by the PCIT is quashed [ Art, 226 ]

S. 254(1):Appellate Tribunal –Stay- While deciding an application for stay of demand, the Appellate Tribunal can only consider the prima facie case of merits. It cannot give a final finding on the merits and decide the appeal itself.[ Central Excise Act , S. 35B ]

S. 159 : Legal representatives –Notice or order on dead person or wound up company is a nullity subject to condition that the department is made aware of the death or winding up. If the assessee participated in the proceedings and thereafter has taken the plea that order or notice was served on dead person , wound-up company are nullity. In such cases, the assessment is liable to be set-aside for a fresh assessment in accordance with law instead of its annulment.[ S.163, 176 ]

S. 143(3) : Assessment –On Money- The fact that the assessee has sold flats at an undervaluation does not mean that he has understated the consideration and earned undisclosed ‘on money’. The mere presumption that excess price could have been charged is not a ground for coming to the conclusion that the assessee did charge a higher price. The burden of proving such understatement or concealment is on the Revenue- Addition was deleted .

S. 68 : Cash credits –Bogus share premium-Addition cannot be made on the ground that the directors of the share subscribers did not turn up before the AO. The assessee can be required to prove only such facts which are in his knowledge. Creditworthiness of the subscriber cannot be disputed by the AO of the assessee but by the AO of the subscriber. If the assessee has discharged its onus to prove identity, creditworthiness & genuineness of the share applicants, the onus shifts to AO to disprove the documents furnished by assessee. In absence of any investigation, much less gathering of evidence by the AO, an addition cannot be sustained merely based on inferences drawn by circumstance .

S. 68:Cash credits- Survey-Addition of undisclosed income cannot be made on the basis of (a) entries in dairy found during survey & (b) admission of director in s. 133A survey if assessee has filed a retraction and alleged that the entries/ statement were recorded under pressure. Statement u/s 133A is merely information simplicitor and not evidence per se. Addition cannot be sustained if the Dept has not investigated the matter and find material to support the addition. [S.133A ]

Interpretation of taxing statutes -Income-tax — Provisions of Customs Act And Excise Act are different and not relevant in construing provisions of income-tax Act.