S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Tax deducted at source could not be remitted to Central Government within time due to delay in grant of fee reimbursement by State Government-Reasonable cause-High Court quashed the criminal prosecution- SLP of revenue dismissed. [S.201(1)(a),278AA, 279, Art. 136]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Not specifying the charge-None of the relevant columns have been indicated nor have the irrelevant columns been struck off- Appeal of assessee was allowed-Order of Tribunal affirming the penalty was quashed and set aside. [S.260A, 274]

S. 269ST : Mode of undertaking transactions -Cash payment- Redevelopment of immovable property-Defendant, seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII rule 11(d) of the CPC on the ground of statutory violation, is misconceived, as the same fails to establish any express legal prohibition that would preclude the Court from adjudicating the instant claim for recovery.[S.269ST(b), 271DA, 273B, Indian Contract Act, 1872, S.2(h), 10, 23]

S. 268A : Appeal- Instructions-Where monetary limit for filing appeals by revenue before High Court had been enhanced to Rs. 2 crores vide circular dated 17-09-2024 and tax liability of assessee was less than Rs. 2 crores- Appeal of revenue dismissed due to monetary limits.[S. 260A]

S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Unexplained money-Non -Resident-Cash deposit in bank-Non -service of notice-Order passed under section 264 was quashed and set aside and matter was to be remanded to Commissioner to pass a fresh order after considering facts of case and submissions of assessee that assessment order was passed on basis of notice never served.[S. 69A, 144, 147, 148, Art. 226]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
Unexplained investments-Unaccounted cash sales-Assessing Officer had duly examined issue of unaccounted cash sales during assessment proceedings -Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order passed by the Commissioner is affirmed. [S.69C 143(3), 260A, 263, Explanation 2.]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash credit-Order of High Court quashing the revision order was affirmed-SLP of revenue dismissed.[S. 68, Art. 136]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Investment in a residential house -More than one house -High Court held that findings of fact recorded by Tribunal in impugned order could not be termed as perverse or contrary to evidence on record and in overall view of matter, decision of Tribunal was correct and required no interference -SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 54F, 143(3), Art. 136]

S. 254(1) : Appellate Tribunal- Duties-CIT(A) decided the appeal on merits-Revision by the Commissioner-It was incumbent upon Tribunal to have decided appeal on merits rather than finding that the assessee ought to have questioned under section 263 in a separate proceedings-Order of Tribunal set aside to decide for fresh consideration. [S. 115JB,253, 263, 250, 260A]

S. 254 (1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers- Additional evidence-Writ of mandamus-In absence of any challenge to order of Appellate Tribunal, it was not permissible to issue a mandamus to Appellate Tribunal to admit and consider remaining documents- Writ petition of revenue was dismissed. [S. 254(2), Art. 226]