S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
-Requirement of reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Return of income of assessee selected under “transfer pricing risk” parameter-Failure by AO to make reference or record satisfaction for not doing so-Instruction of Board not followed-Order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue-Revision justified —CBDT Instruction No. 3 Of 2016, Dated 10-3-2016 .[S. 92C, 144C, 119,263 Expl. 2(c)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Income from other sources-Receipt of consideration for shares in excess of fair market value-Share premium received from 100 per cent. holding company-Deeming provision cannot be applied-Order passed by AO accepting the returned income was not prejudicial to the interest of the revenue-Revision not sustainable .[S. 56(2)(viib), 68,]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Depreciation-Additional depreciation-Balance of additional depreciation w.r.t asset put to use in previous year can be claimed in the subsequent year-Revision order is quashed. [S. 32(1)(iia)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited scrutiny-Co-operative societies-Deduction allowed by AO in limited scrutiny assessment to examine “Deduction under Chapter VI-A”.-Possible view-Revision is not valid. [S. 80P(2)(d)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cost of acquisition of asset-The amount paid to intermediary allottee from builder would form part of cost of acquisition-Revision is held to be not valid.[S. 45 ,48]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Stock in trade-Builder-Business income-Income from house property-Revision is held to be not valid .[S.22, 28(i)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Rental income-The Assessing officer has taken one plausible view based on exhaustive inquiries and detailed submissions unless the view adopted is not at all sustainable in law-Revision is held to be not valid .[S. 22, 28(i)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
High Court held that the assessee to be a society providing public utility services within the meaning of section 2(15) which was eventually affirmed by the Supreme Court-PCIT was wrong to hold Assessment Order to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue.-Revision order was quashed.[S. 2(15), 11, 12 13(8), 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Corpus donation-Assessment completed after due verification / examination by AO of corpus donation including bank statements, balance sheet and confirmation of donation from donor which was also registered u/s. 12AA-Revision order was quashed.[S.12AA]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Property held for charitable purposes-Spending from accumulation of income of earlier year-The Assessing Officer had conducted necessary enquiries regarding utilization of income for purpose for which it was accumulated and had accepted same which was a plausible view, impugned revision order was untenable .[S. 11(3), 11 (5)]