S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Reassessment order-Issue on which revision order was passed was neither subject matter of reassessment nor coming to notice during reassessment proceedings-Order is not erroneous. [S. 143(3), 147, 148]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Development expenses-Neither filed any written submission nor appeared before the Tribunal-Revision is justified.

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Purchase of property-Not pointing out error in order passed by Assessing Officer and how it was prejudicial to Revenue-Revision order was quashed.[S. 56(2)(vii)(b)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Demonetisation period-Cash deposits-Duty of the Assessing Officer to carry out investigation-Revision is proper. [S. 143(3), 263, Explanation 2]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Industrial undertaking-Generation of power-Windmill Assessing Officer applied his mind-Revision on the ground Assessing Officer did not examine whether separate books maintained-Not sustainable merely because Commissioner has different opinion-Revision is not valid. [S. 80IA(4)(iv), 80IA(7)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Limited Scrutiny for verification of cash deposits-Assessing Officer has not made proper verification-Revision is held to be justified. [S. 143(3)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Depreciation-Amalgamation of companies-Accounting Standard 14-Excess consideration paid over and above net asset value of amalgamating Company-Goodwill-Revision was quashed. [S. 32(1)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Assessing Officer made complete enquiries-No adverse comments made by investigation department-Failure to bring evidence of cash deposited in account by Principal Commissioner-Proceedings without any merit-Revision order was quashed. [S. 147, 148]

S. 255 : Appellate Tribunal-Procedure-Functions-Monetary limit-Remand by Division Bench-Objection that appeals ought to be heard by Division Bench-Not tenable-Appeals of earlier year on same issue pending before High Court-Tribunal is not bound to keep appeals for latter years in abeyance-Principle of Res Judicata not applicable. [S. 254(1), 255(3)]

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Jurisdictional High Court-Tribunal’s order based on decision of Supreme Court-Supreme Court Dismissing Special Leave Petition filed by Department-Tribunal’s order cannot be rectified-No addition can be made in respect of assessments which have become final if no incriminating material is found during search–ICDs and CFSs are infrastructural facility entitled to deduction under sub-section (4) of section 80-IA. [S.80IA(4), Art. 141]