S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Corpus fund-Corpus Donations-Securing admission-Tribunal is not justified in holding ineligible for exemption on corpus Fund.[S.11(1)(a), S. 11, Property held for charitable purposes.[S. 11(1)(d), 260A]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Denial of exemption When the registration is granted by the CIT(E), further probe by Assessing Officer into objects of Trust based on such objects is not permissible-Activities of to identify, enrol, allot work, regulate operation of private workers from time of inception-Activities for advancement of general public utility-Surplus earned retained for carrying out activity-Cannot be treated as business activity-Exemption cannot be denied-Advances to Trustees-Interest recognised on accrual basis-Loans covered by adequate security and interest-Cannot be treated as investments in violation of S.11(5) 11(3) of the Act-No violation of Section 13(1)(c). 13(2) of the Act. Accumulation of funds-Form 10 filed for Assessment Year 1999-2000 showing purpose of accumulation-Purpose of accumulation is not general in nature-Activities carried on in accordance with approved charitable objects for which assessee was formed and registered-No violation of Section 11(2) [S. 11(2) 11(4A), 11(5), 12A, 13(1)(c), 13(2)]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Denial of exemption When the registration is granted by the CIT(E), further probe by Assessing Officer into objects of Trust based on such objects is not permissible-Activities of to identify, enrol, allot work, regulate operation of private workers from time of inception-Activities for advancement of general public utility-Surplus earned retained for carrying out activity-Cannot be treated as business activity-Exemption cannot be denied-Advances to Trustees-Interest recognised on accrual basis-Loans covered by adequate security and interest-Cannot be treated as investments in violation of S.11(5) 11(3) of the Act-No violation of Section 13(1)(c). 13(2) of the Act. Accumulation of funds-Form 10 filed for Assessment Year 1999-2000 showing purpose of accumulation-Purpose of accumulation is not general in nature-Activities carried on in accordance with approved charitable objects for which assessee was formed and registered-No violation of Section 11(2)-Delay of 496 days in filing the SLP-SLP of Revenue is dismissed. [S. 11(2) 11(4A), 11(5), 12A, 13(1)(c), 13(2) Art. 136]

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Provision of connectivity solutions-Services to customers of Indian companies outside India-Consideration received on basis of agreements from telecommunication operators for Bandwidth and inter-connectivity usage of their customers-Provisions of double taxation avoidance agreement override statutory provisions and amendments thereto-Receipts not assessable as royalty in India-No alienation of copyrighted articles, patents, trademarks, designs, models, secret formulae or processes, property or information-Mere advantage or benefit derived from service provided cannot be countenanced to fall within meaning of expressions use or right to use-Receipts under agreements for provision of bandwidth not royalty-Use or right to use-DTAA-India-Singapore.[S.90(2),260A, Art.3(2), 12(3)]

S. 250 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Non-speaking order – Procedure Cash credits – Un secured loan from Magunta exports – Return showing nil income –Duty of CIT(A) – Duty to give reasons for order – Conclusions were in the nature of ipse dixit and no supporting reasons were discernible – Order of CIT(A) confirming the addition is set aside – Matter remanded to the file of the CIT(A). [ S. 68, 115BBE, 250, Art .226 ]

S. 271G : Penalty-Documents-International transaction-Transfer pricing-TPO had not proposed any adjustment-Levy of penalty is not justified. [S.92C, 92D]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Winnings from lotteries or crossword puzzles-Online gaming-Winning amount paid to players of games available on its website-Revision is justified for for limited purpose of examining issue of deduction of TDS under section 194B.[S. 194B]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Urban agricultural land-Capital asset-Liable to be assessed as capital gains-Revision is affirmed. [S. 2(14), 45]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–Exemption-Investment in residential house-Time limit-Date of transfer of shares-Capital gains-Investment in a residential house-Investment made in land beyond period of two years-Revision is not justified-Entitle to exemption.[S. 45, 54F]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Dealer in gold-Loss through MCX transactions for hedging its stock-in-trade-Loss is business loss-Not speculative-Revision is not valid.[S. 28(i)) 43(5)(d), 143(3)]