S. 2(22)(e) : Deemed dividend-Loans and advance-Provision is applicable-Matter remanded to Tribunal to decide on merit. [S. 260A]

Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 .
S. 4 : Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Tribunal recalled its order , restored appeal and posted it for fresh hearing- Doctrine of relation back were to be applied- Pendency of appeal of revenue before Appellate Tribunal- Rejection of application is held to be not valid [ Art , 226 ]
Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 .
S. 4 : Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Tribunal recalled its order , restored appeal and posted it for fresh hearing- Doctrine of relation back were to be applied- Pendency of appeal of revenue before Appellate Tribunal- Rejection of application is held to be not valid [ Art , 226 ]

The Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020.

S. 4 : Filing of declaration and particulars to be furnished – Appeal with drawn as dismissed .[ S.54B , 260A ]

S. 271AAB : Penalty-Search initiated on or after 1st day of July 2012-undisclosed income-Filed income tax return as per specified date-Penalty leviable only 10 %-Anonymous donations-derived income-purpose for which it is utilized-No need to mention address of donors. [S. 115BBC]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice-Not specifying the charge-Quantum appeal admitted before High Court-Penalty was deleted. [S. 274]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Failure to strike off the irrelevant default in show cause notice-Levy of penalty is held to be not valid. [S. 274(1)]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Notice-Irrelevant words were not strike down by AO-Non application of mind by AO-Notice was bad in law-Levy of penalty is held to be bad in law. [S. 274]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-disallowance u/s.10A-only on presumption basis-Not due to inaccurate information-Penalty was deleted. [S.10A]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Assessee’s good faith cannot be disproved-Transaction is held to be at ALP-Levy of penalty is held to be not justified. [S. 92CA(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Just because Commissioner was not satisfied with manner of verification and investigation-Assessment order held not to be erroneous-Revision order was quashed. [S. 143(3)]