S. 32 : Depreciation-Goodwill-Amalgamation-Difference between purchase consideration and net assets acquired on demerger-Claim for depreciation not disputed in year immediately following demerger Disallowance of depreciation in later years relying solely on fifth proviso to section 32(1)-Proviso applicable only in year following demerger-Depreciation claim for subsequent years not barred-Matter remanded to Tribunal.[S. 43(6)(c)]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Educational trust-Trust not registered under section 12AA at time of filing return-Registration obtained subsequently after assessment-Rectification application under section 154 rejected-Assessee cannot be denied legitimate deductions otherwise available as regular assessee-Purpose of assessment to recover legitimate tax and not unjust tax Assessing Officer not expected to act mechanically to fasten unjust tax liability-Matter remitted to Assessing Officer for fresh assessment order. [S.12, 12A, 12AA, 139, 143(1), 154]

S. 10A : Free trade zone-Export-Hundred per cent. export oriented unit-Transfer of stocks from assessee’s eligible unit to foreign unit-Finding by Tribunal that transferred stock sold by foreign unit and which constituted more than 75 per cent. of total sales-Entitled to exemption-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S.10B, 260A]

S. 10A : Free trade zone-Transfer to units outside India-Export sales Tribunal finding they were export sales and allowing exemption-High Court holding no question of law-Assessee-company going into liquidation and unable to pay demand-Matter disposed of leaving question of law open. [S. 10B, Art. 136]

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Non-resident-Royalty-or technical fees-Customer relationship management related services-Copyright in application not transferred to subscriber-SLP of revenue dismissed-(1994) 209 ITR (St.) 1)-DTAA-India-Singapore. [S.9(1)(vii),Art. 12(4)(b)]

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Permanent establishment-Test of “virtual projection” cannot be applied on perception or theory-Liaison office and wholly-owned subsidiary do not constitute PE in absence of evidence of disposal, control or authority to conclude contracts-Onus on Revenue to establish existence of PE-Subsidiary carrying on independent business on principal-to-principal basis-No fixed place or dependent agent PE-Interest on delayed consideration taxable-Supply of software not royalty or FTS under-DTAA-India-Finland. (1985) 152 ITR (St.) 57). [S. 90(2), Art. 5(8)]

S. 254(2): Rectification of mistake apparent on record – Subsequent judgment of Supreme Court cannot be ground for recall/rectification – Tribunal having followed binding jurisdictional High Court judgment at the time of passing original order – No mistake apparent from record – Miscellaneous Application dismissed. [S. 36(1)(va), 43B]

S. 226:Collection and mode of recovery – Recovery of tax –Pendency of appeal before CIT( A) – Stay of demand – Non-speaking order – Application of mind – Principles of natural justice – Allowing the writ, the Court held that the order rejecting the assessee’s stay application was a non-speaking order passed without considering the submissions made by the assessee- The matter was remanded to the Principal Commissioner for fresh consideration after granting a hearing and by passing a reasoned speaking order- Till disposal of the stay application afresh, the Revenue was restrained from taking any coercive recovery action. [ S. 220(6), 226(3),250, Art. 226]

S. 154: Rectification – Mandatory requirement of DIN – Back-dated rectification order – Limitation – Violation of CBDT Circular No. 19/2019 – Order deemed never issued – Writ maintainable despite alternate remedy. [S. 119, 154(3), 154(7), 250, 292B, Art. 226]

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases –Information from Sales- Tax Department – Failure to prove genuineness of purchases –Order of the Appellate Tribunal holding that only profit estimation at 12. 5% was set aside – Order of the Assessing Officer confirming the addition of entire purchases a bogus under section 69C of the Income -tax Act was affirmed by High Court – SLP of assessee dismissed . [S.69C 133(6), 143(3), 144, 147, 148, Art . 136 ]