S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Duties Cross examination of witness –Order of High Court set aside and matter remanded to the Office of CIT (A) to give an opportunity of cross examination of witness and decide according to law – Demand and attachment stayed until the matter decided by the CIT (A) [ S. 220 ]

S. 246A : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Stay -Rejection of stay application blindly following the office memorandum was set aside – Directed to decide the stay application on merit [ S. 226 250 , Art , 226 ]

S. 245D : Settlement Commission – No power of review – Order of Settlement Commission is set aside and directed to decide the issue in accordance with law . [ S. 154, 234A, 234B , 234C 245D(4) , 254E, 245F , 245I , Art , 226 ]

S. 241A : Refund-Power to with hold in certain cases – Review petition of the assessee is dismissed . [ S. 143 (1) , 143(ID ) 143 (2) ]

S. 241A : Refund-Power to withhold in certain cases-Limited scrutiny [S.143 (1) . 143 (2), Art. 226 ]

S.237: Refunds – Verification of tax deducted at source- Technical glitches and enable TRACES portal – Income-tax Authorities are directed to decide the assessee’s request within four weeks [ S.200A, Art , 226 ]

S. 220 : Collection and recovery – Not following the direction of Court and suppressing the facts – Petitioner mislead High Court at preliminary hearing of petition which led to passing interim order- Petition dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 5 lakhs to be paid to Delhi High Court Advocates’ Welfare Trust [ S. 220(6), 250 , Art . 226 ]

S. 192 : Deduction at source – Salary – Reimbursement of expenditure incurred by them towards uniform on the basis of self certification by employees – Not liable to deduct tax at source . [ S. 10 (14)(i) , 201 (IA )

S.149 : Reassessment – Time limit for notice – Direction of CIT (A) – Reassessment barred by limitation cannot be reopened – Reassessment was quashed . [ S.143(1), 149(1)(b) ]

S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – When alternative remedy of appeal is available under statute, it would not be appropriate and proper for High Court to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction conferred on High Court .[ S.147 , Art , 226 ]