S. 9(1)(vii):Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Fees for technical services – Agreement for export of garments – Inspecting garments, ensuring quality and export within stipulated time – Income of non- resident is not taxable in India- No substantial question of law – DTAA-India – Hong Kong [ S. Explanation 2 S 9(1)(vii) , 195 , 201 (IA), 260A , Art , 12 ]

S. 2(22)(e):Dividend – Reassessment – Deemed dividend-Deferred liability —Not Shareholder of lender company — Loan not assessable as deemed dividend [ S.147 , 148 ]

Securities Transaction Tax ( STT) -Finance Act, 2004

S.105: Penalty for non collection and non -deposit of STT- Imposition of penalty is not automatic- Deletion of penalty is held to be justified .[ S.100 , 108 ]

S. 276CC : Offences and prosecutions – Failure to furnish return of income – Failure to file return- Prior approval of CCIT was sought by CIT before passing the sanction order u/s 279- Prosecution is held to be not maintainable [ S.133A, 139(1), 142(10, 153, 278E, 279, Criminal Procedure Code, 200 ]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions – Wilful attempt to evade tax – Delay in payment of tax and filing of return – Delay in handing over books of account- Criminal proceeding is held to be clear abuse of process of law – Proceedings pending before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was quashed . [ S.132 , 276(2)]

S.271D: Penalty – Takes or accepts any loan or deposit -Dairy seized – Deletion of penalty is held to be valid [ S.132 ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Penny stock- Capital gains- Order passed in haste and without proper enquiry can be revised – PCIT can not conclude the issue and direct the Assessing Officer to decide it in a particular manner [ S.45 ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Rejection of books of account – Revision order directing the Assessing Officer to make addition u/s 68 or 41 is held to be not valid [ S.41, 68, 145(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Assessment – Limited scrutiny case – Commissioner cannot exercise the power to look in to any issue which the Assessing Officer Could not look at [ S.50C(2),56(2)(vii)(b)(ii), 143(3)]

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record –Limitation of six months- Tribunal does not have the power to condone the delay – High court has the power to condone the delay- Tribunal is bound to dispose the appeal on merits even in the absence of the assessee or its counsel – Dismissal of appeal for prosecution is resulted in a failure of justice . [ S.144C , 254(1) , ITAT, R. 24 , Art ,226, 227 ]