S. 143(3):Assessment-Limited scrutiny-Additional legal ground is admitted-Cash deposits-Assessing Officer converted the limited scrutiny to regular assessment-Order is quashed and set aside-Instruction No. 5 Of 2016, Dated 14-7-2016 (2016) 385 ITR 56 (St) [S. 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), 68,69A, 133(6), 142(1), 143(2), 254(1)]

S.143(3): Assessment-Agricultural income-Estimation-Matter remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication-The Tribunal also directed the assessee to pay cost of Rs. 6,000 with the direction to deposit costs in the Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund and receipt thereof to be produced before the Assessing Officer before the commencement of the proceedings.

S. 143(3) : Assessment-Search-Statement in the course off search-Purchase of property-No incriminating material was fund-Dumb document-Addition is deleted. [S. 132, 158BC]

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Non-Resident of Japan-Incurred loss-Only profits earned by Permanent Establishment in India is liable to tax-Addition is deleted-DTAA-India-Japan.[Art.7]

S. 271B : Penalty-Failure to get accounts audited-Death of assessee-Legal representative-Legal representative of deceased offender or criminal could not be penalised for offences or crimes committed by deceased.[S.44AB, 139(1), 159(4)]

S.271AAC : Penalty in respect of certain income-Unexplained cash deposit-Addition deleted-Levy of penalty is deleted. [S.69A]

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after Ist day of July 2012-Undisclosed income-Mere surrender of income is not sufficient to levy the penalty-Penalty is deleted.[S. 132, 132(4),153A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credits-Sale of property-Showing company as seller-26AS showing tax deducted at source-Sub-Registrar’s Letter stating no sale transaction is specified-Incorrect income calculation rectifiable-Revision order is quashed. [S. 154]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business loss-Set-off of brought-forward loss of earlier year in current year is unjustified-Revision is valid-Direction of Commissioner to reduce interest from the cost of project is not valid-Revision is not justified. [S. 28(i), 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Interest-Failure to conduct adequate inquiries-Interest paid and received-Justification for claiming interest-Without identifying any specific error in the order-Revision order is quashed. [S. 56, 57(iii), 143(3)]