S. 28(i) : Business income-Rental income-Sub-letting of mall could not be assessed as income from house property and same was to be assessed as income from business. [S. 22]

S. 17(2) : Salary-Perquisite-Stock options were merely held by assessee and same had not been exercised till date, same would not constitute income chargeable to tax in hands of assessee as none of contingencies specified in section 17(2)(vi) had occurred-Payment in question was not linked to employment, rather it was a onetime voluntary payment to all option holders of ESOP, compensation would not tantamount to perquisite under section 17(2)(vi) of the Act.[S.17(2)(vi), 197, Art. 226]

S. 17(2) : Salary-Perquisite-Employer’s grant of interest-free loans or loans at concessional rate would qualify as a ‘fringe benefit’ and ‘perquisite’ as understood through its natural usage in common parlance-Enactment of subordinate legislation for levying tax on interest-free/concessional loans as a fringe benefit is within rule making power under section 17(2)(viii) and enactment of rule 3(7)(i) is not a case of excessive delegation and falls within parameters of permissible delegation. Rule 3(7)(i) is intra vires section 17(2)(viii) and therefore, section 17(2)(viii) does not lead to an excessive delegation of ‘essential legislative function’ to CBDT-Fixation of SBI’s rate of interest, i.e., PLR, as benchmark to determine value of benefit to assessee in comparison to rate of interest charged by other individual banks under rule 3(7)(i) is neither an arbitrary nor unequal exercise of power and is intra vires article 14 of constitution of India. [S.17(2)(viii), Rule 3(7)(i), Art. 14, 136]

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration-Trust or institution-Cancellation of registration-Commissioner had no jurisdiction to cancel registration certificate once granted by him to assessee under section 12A till 1-10-2004 [S. 12A, 260A]

S. 10(23C) : Charitable institution-Promoting, advancing and protecting trade, commerce and industry in India–Matter was remanded to Chief Commissioner for de novo consideration by applying law as laid down by Tribunal.Matter remanded- Precedent – Order of Tribunal binding on revenue .[S. 2(15), 10(23C)(iv), Art. 226]

S. 10(23C) : Educational institution-Charitable purpose-Order of High Court affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed-Delay of 247b days-Review petition is dismissed on account of delay as well as on merits. [S. 2(15), 10(23C)(iv), Art. 136]

S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Fees for technical services-Sale of software-Subscription fees-Order of High Court is affirmed-SLP of Revenue is dismissed-DTAA-India-USA [S.9(1)(vii), art. 12, Art. 136]

S. 9(1)(v) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Interest-Other income-Guarantee to various banks to extend credit facilities to its Indian subsidiaries-Guarantee charges were not received by assessee in respect of any debt owed to it by its Indian subsidiary-Guarantee fee would not fall within expression ‘interest’ in article 12 of India UK DTAA-Accrue-Arise-Income-DTAA-India-UK-Northern Ireland / [S. 2(28A), 5(2), 260A, art.7, 12(5), 23(3)]

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Liaison Office-Non-Resident company-Did not finalize and transact a business deal and activities-Liaison Office could not be said to be preparatory or auxiliary in nature, LO did not constitute Permanent Establishment of assessee-MIPL was not performing additional function, in absence of material, it could not be taken as dependant agency PE to assessee, a non-resident company-Delay of 395 days-SLP of Revenue is dismissed on account of delay as well as on merits-DTAA-India-Japan [art. 5, Art. 136]

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Subsidy-Capital or revenue-Bengal Incentive Scheme, 2004-Linked to establishment of new units-Capital in nature.[S.28(i)]