S. 9(1)(vi) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Royalty-Premium paid was for imparting commercial information and knowledge and was royalty both under Act and under DTAA-Premium payment could not be treated as fees for technical services-India-Brazil. [S. 5, 9(1)(vii), Art. 12(3)]

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax-Income or capital-Sale of Carbon Credits-Capital receipt-No cost of acquisition of production to get entitlement Not assessable under any head of income. [S. 28(i), 56]

S. 147 : Reassessment – Bogus purchases – Information must be reliable and there must be some evidence to believe that purchases are bogus- Reassessment was quashed . [ S.148 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment –Reasons recorded are different than the reasons supplied – Reassessment was quashed. [ S. 148 ]
.

S. 72 : Set off of loss-long term capital loss-Tax planning with in frame work of law is permissible -Long term capital loss is allowed to be set off against long term capital gains. [S. 45]

S. 4 : Charge of income-tax – Hardship allowance received from the Developer – Capital receipt-Not chargeable to tax. [S. 2(24)(vi)]

S. 69C : unexplained expenditure-Bogus hawala purchases-Third party statement-Opportunity of cross examination was not provided-Payments were through banking channels by way of letter of credit-Order of Tribunal deleting the addition was affirmed-No question of law. [S. 260A]

S. 148 : Reassessment – Notice – Constitutional validity – The delegation authorized being only for the purpose of enlarging limitation under a valid law, such delegation could not be exercised to resurrect the provision of law that stood omitted from the statute book by virtue of its substitution made by the Finance Act, 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021.- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Interpretation of Taxing Statutes — Legislative Substitution- Cassus omisus cannot be supplied, either by the delegated legislation or by Courts – The Enabling Act only extended the limitation up to 31.03.2021 to do certain things only. Thereafter, it delegated the power to cause such further extensions to do those things beyond the date 31.12.2020, upto 30.06.2021 – delegate to do colourably, that which it cannot directly do after the Parliament enforced Sections 2 to 88 of the Finance Act 2021, w.e.f. 01.04.2021. once the principal legislation enacted the law as has been done in the present case, its delegate was denuded of its powers, in the field occupied by the principal legislature- Reassessment notices issued under section 148 of the Act are quashed . [ S. 147, 148A, 149, 151 , 151A , 153,292 Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 , S.3(1) of the Act 38 of 2020, Art , 226 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years – No failure to disclose material facts –Interest income – Deduction – Change of opinion –No power of review – Reassessment is held to be bad in law [ S. 37 (1), 56, 57, 148 , Art , 226 ]

S.68: Cash credits – Share application money – Shell company – The DCF method adopted is incorrect and fallacious- the two investing companies held to fit the description of a shell company- The burden is on the assessee to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness and nature and source of credits in his books of accounts, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer even if confirmations are filed and the persons are assessed to tax- Theory of human probability applied – Addition as cash credits is held to be justified on the facts of the case – Reassessment is held to be justified . [ S. 133(6), 143(3) , 147, 148, Rule 27 ITAT Rules ,1963 ] S.68: Cash credits – Share application money – Shell company – The DCF method adopted is incorrect and fallacious- the two investing companies held to fit the description of a shell company- The burden is on the assessee to prove the identity, capacity and genuineness and nature and source of credits in his books of accounts, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer even if confirmations are filed and the persons are assessed to tax- Theory of human probability applied – Addition as cash credits is held to be justified on the facts of the case – Reassessment is held to be justified . [ S. 133(6), 143(3) , 147, 148, Rule 27 ITAT Rules ,1963 ]