S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Modes of recovery-Stay-Pendency of appeal-Prima facie case-Pre-deposit of 20 percent of demand is not mandatory-Matter remanded to the AO for reconsideration.[S. 250, Art. 226]

S. 220 : Collection and recovery-Assessee deemed in default-Refund-Adjustment of refund against demand without considering stay application-Matter is remanded for reconsideration. [S.220 (6), Art. 226]

S. 154 : Rectification of mistake-Mistake apparent from the record-Refund-Excess levy of surcharge-Strictures-Statutory remedy-Technological impediment cannot be a reason for harassing an assessee year after year and therefore, Income Tax Department should take steps to upgrade software instead of blaming technology for erroneous calculation of surcharge-Immediate steps must be taken by Revenue to upgrade software or take such other steps as might be necessary to ensure that such mistake did not occur in future-Central Board for Direct Taxes should also take necessary steps for rectifying software as issue might not be resolved by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. [S. 156, 220, 237, 240, Art. 132, 226]

S. 153C : Assessment-Income of any other person-Search-Merely on the basis of statement under section 132(4) without any other material discovered during the search-No addition can be made-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition is affirmed.[S. 132, 132(4), 143(3), 260A, 292B]

S. 151 : Reassessment-After the expiry of four years-Sanction for issue of notice-Recording of satisfaction-There is no requirement for the CIT to record his own reasons and it would suffice that he records the satisfaction regarding the reasons recorded the AO. [S. 147, 148, Art. 226]

S 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Merger-Amalgamation-Notice in the name of non-existing amalgamating company-Transferor-company got merged with assessee/transferee-company under scheme of amalgamation and thereby lost its existence, assessment order passed subsequently in name of said non-existing entity, would be without jurisdiction and set aside. [S.147, 148, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Natural justice-Order passed next day-Rules of natural justice are found completely broken-Order is quashed and set aside-AO is directed to pass the order after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing. [S. 142(1), O 148, 148A(b)I, 148A((d), Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Notice in the name of deceased-Non application of mind by the Assessing Officer and sanctioning authority-Notice and order disposing the objection is quashed. [S. 148, 148A(b), 148A(d), 151, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Order by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) and not by a Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO), as required by provisions of section 151A,-Notice under sections 148A(b)/148 was not sustainable and was liable to be set aside.[S.148, 148A(b) 148A(d), 151A(2), Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment-Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice-Interest income-Any information-It is incumbent on the AO to apply his mind to all such materials-Any information which is derived from S. 135A would be sacrosanct and/or would be free of defects-Interest income received from the bank-Notice issued is arbitrary and vitiated by non application of mind hence quashed. [S. 135A,143(1), 148A(b), 148A(d), Art. 14,19(1)(g), 226, 265, 300A]