S. 279 : Offences and prosecutions – Sanction – Chief Commissioner – Commissioner -Compounding application filed beyond 36 months from the date of filing of complaint- Rejection of application- CBDT guidelines are not statute -Rejection of compounding application is quashed – Commissioner is directed to consider all facts and circumstances and decide whether such facts make out the case for exercising discretion in favour of compounding the offence. [ S. 279(2) , Art. 226 ]

S. 69C: Unexplained expenditure – Bogus purchases –Information from Sales- Tax Department – Failure to prove genuineness of purchases – Addition is justified –Order of the Appellate Tribunal holding that only profit estimation at 12. 5% can be made is set aside – Order of the Assessing Officer is affirmed . [S. 133(6), 143(3), 144, 147, 148, 260A]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Deletion of concealment penalty-Concealment-Acquittal by Trial Court-Presumption of innocence of accused-Appeal against acquittal is dismissed. [S.271(1)(c), 277]

S. 276C : Offences and prosecutions-Wilful attempt to evade tax-Concealment of income-Deletion of penalty-Prosecution is not valid. [S. 271(1)(c),

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Compounding of offences-Application for compounding-Delay in application-Discretion of authority to condone delay should be exercised in judicious manner. [S. 279]

S. 254(2A): Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Cash credits-Prescribing 20 Per Cent. predeposit of demand is justified-Order of Tribunal is sustained.[S.68, 220(6), Art. 226]

S. 254(2A): Appellate Tribunal-Stay-Cash credits-Prescribing 20 Per Cent. predeposit of demand Income-Tax-Thirty Per Cent. of demand paid by assessee-Order of High Court is modified granting stay of recovery pending appeal to Tribunal-Tribunal is directed to decide appeal on merits without being influenced by observations of High Court.[S. 68, 220(6), Art. 136]

S. 246A : Appeal-Commissioner (Appeals)-Stay of demand-Not proved prima facie case-Condition of pre deposit of 20 Per Cent. of demand for grant of stay discretionary-Financial stringency not proved-Writ petition is dismissed. [S. 156, 220 (6), Art. 226]

S. 245D : Settlement Commission-Settlement of cases-Procedure-Application-Search and seizure and Survey-Disclosing unaccounted income-Order of settlement Commission on basis of volumetric report of person not qualified and incompetent to evaluate mined ore submitted by department is unsustainable-Withdrawal of writ petition against survey proceedings with liberty to pursue issue of volumetric report before Settlement Commission-No presumption of estoppel against assessee by withdrawal of writ petition-Assessment of undisclosed income can be done only with reference to incriminating material recovered from search and not post search material-Report stating inaccuracies of report prepared by incompetent person and submitted by Department-Dismissal of statutory mining plan prepared under mines and minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957 and approved by IBM-Order of Settlement Commission erroneous-Matter remanded to Settlement Commission.[S. 132, 132, 133A, 153A, 245C, 245D(4) Mines And Minerals (Development And Regulation) Act, 1957, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Grant of approval without application of mind-Benefits of giving opportunity of hearing after issue of initial notice under Section 148A(b)-Order passed under Section 148A(d) without giving requested opportunity of hearing-Approval by Principal Commissioner without application of mind-Order and consequent notice is set aside. [S. 147, 148, 148(A)(b) 148A(d), 149(1((b), 151, Art. 226]