S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Capital gains-Denial of special deduction claimed against income from long term capital gain-No business income shown-High court decision in favour-Tribunal Denying Deductions On Basis Of Later Supreme Court Ruling-Deduction admissible-Not a case of furnishing inaccurate particular-Penalty not leviable. [S.45 8oG 80HHC 112(2)]

S. 271D : Penalty-Takes or accepts any loan or deposit-Long term capital gains-Received cash on sale of immovable property in AY 2016-17-Deposited cash during demonetisation period-Levied penalty for contravention of S. 269SS-Deleted penalty as S. 269SS was violated in AY 2016-17 and not in AY. 2017-18.[S. 45, 269SS]

S. 270A : Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Concealment of income subject to conditions-search and seizure-held, AO cannot make an assumption that the assessee would not disclose income if the due date to file return has not expired based on previous record. [S. 132]

S. 270A : Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Addition made is estimate made by DVO-The levy of penalty is not valid .[S.43CA]

S. 270A : Penalty for under-reporting and misreporting of income-Deemed provisions-Cannot fall in the category of underreporting of income. Also pertinent for the Assessing officer alleging underreporting/misreporting of Income is to specify the limb under which penalty proceedings have been initiated. [S.43CA, 562(2)(x)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
AO, without examining the matter, simply accepted the explanation of the assessee, which was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue-the issue was complicated and needed detailed verification of Accounting Standards followed & law applicable-Principal Commissioner directed the AO to verify and pass the assessment order afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity to the assessee-Held, no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Principal Commissioner.[S.92CA, 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Citing the possibility of multiple valid views on the assessment-Revision order is set aside.[S. 2(22)(e)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-No discussion in the assessment order-Assessing Officer applied his mind during assessment proceedings-Revision order is quashed.[S. 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-survey-Regular books of account not maintained properly-revision of income of return revealed discrepancies-Entitle to set off the loss-Additional income-Direction is contrary to CBDT circular .[S.115BBE, 119,133A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Assessment filed by the retailer approved by the AO-Purchase of lose diamonds not practical according to AO-Finding of Principal Commissioner that enquiry or verification not done not justified. [S. 143(3)]