S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Real estate business-Income from house property-Value of unsold flats as stock-in-trade-Two possible views-Not erroneous-Business expenditure-Details filed before Assessing Officer and expenses allowed-Order is not erroneous-Revision invalid-Interest on tax deducted at source-Failure by Assessing Officer to carry out necessary inquiry-Order erroneous and prejudicial to interests of revenue-Revision is justified [S.23(1)(a), 40(a)(ia)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share transaction-Capital gains-Inadequate enquiry does not amount to lack of enquiry-Revision is quashed-Tribunal recalling earlier ex-parte order-Second appeal becomes as infructuous-Delay is condoned. [S. 45, 143(3),253, 254(1)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Failure to specify exact purpose of accumulation of income-Purpose of accumulation not beyond objects of assessee-Revision is not justified.[S.11(2), 142(1), 143(3), Form No 10.]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Failing to furnish required information-No further enquiry-Revision is justified. [S. 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Business income-Survey-Statement in the course survey-Assessment order is passed due application of mind-No findings recorded by Principal Commissioner how deeming provisions applicable-Survey at business premises alone cannot be basis for revision.[S.68, 69 69A 69B 69C, 69D 115BBE, 133A, 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Firm-Remuneration to partners-Book profits-interest income not excluded while determining allowable deduction of remuneration to partners-Interest income business income-Deduction admissible-Central Board Of Direct Taxes Circular No. 12 Of 2019, Dated 19-6-2019-Revision is quashed. [S. 40(b)(v)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share premium-Discounted cash flow method-Revenue could not compel assessee to choose particular method of valuation-Revision order is quashed. [S. 56(2(viib), 143(3), R.11U, 11UA]

S. 254(2): Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Application is filed after five months from period of extension granted and six months after original order-Delay is not condoned.

S. 251 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Powers-Sundry creditors-Matter restoring back to Assessing Officer to make further enquiries is affirmed. [S. 246A,250, 251(1)(a)]

S. 250 : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Procedure-Passing order merely stating wrong facts by cut paste from other assessee’s record-Matter remanded to Commissioner (Appeals) for adjudication afresh in accordance with law.[S. 249]