S. 68 : Cash credits –lenders are assessed to tax- Confirmation was filed – Interest was paid ,TDS was deducted – Notice issued u/s 133(6) were acknowledged – Order of Tribunal deletion of addition was affirmed – Court observed that the Assessing officer should have desisted from using the general observation and expression “money Laundering” when it was never the case that there was any allegations of money laundering . [ S. 133(6) ]

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to furnish return of income-Assessee must be given opportunity to compound offence. [S. 139, 279, Art, 226]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Mens rea must be proved-Penalty Levied and paid for furnishing incorrect particulars in Income-Tax Return-Prosecution was not valid. [S. 132(4)(a), 277]

S. 269UD : Purchase by Central Government of immoveable properties-Notice must give details which led to inference of undervaluation-Order pf Pre-Emptive purchase not valid-Transferee has a right to challenge order of purchase. [Art, 226]

S. 269UD : Purchase by Central Government of immoveable properties-Valuation of property should be just and reasonable-Rent capitalisation method-Adequate opportunity to be heard not given-Order of purchase of property-Not valid. [Form No. 37I, Art, 226]

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Order of dismissal by Single judge is held to be not proper-Order of Principal Commissioner set aside-Matter remanded to Principal Commissioner. [S. 143(3), 246A, Art, 226]

S. 264 : Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Limitation-Pursuing appeal mistakenly-Delay in filing revision petition-Period spent in prosecuting appeal excluded-Matter remanded to Commissioner. [S. 246A, 248, Limitation Act, 1963, S. 14, Art, 226]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Penalty-Concealment-Commissioner setting aside entire Assessment-Assessing Officer acting under such order of remand can initiate penalty proceedings. [S. 143(3), 271 (1)(c), Art, 226]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Deduction could not be denied on ground companies which used Railway Sidings were group companies-Revision is not valid. [S. 80IA(4)(i)(b)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue Provision for excise duty liability-Input tax credit in other units effectively amounting to constructive payment in next financial year-Revision is not valid. [S. 43B, 142(1)]