S. 263 : Revision-Erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue-Assessee a trust running engineering colleges-Anonymous donations in cash and demand drafts found during search-Receipts offered to tax and taxed under section 115BBC-Principal Commissioner invoking section 263 to deny exemption on capitation fees relying on decision stayed by Supreme Court-Assessment framed after full verification-Twin conditions for section 263 not satisfied-Revision void ab initio-Precedent-Distinction between “stay” of order and “quashing of order”-An order stayed does not become operative from the date of the stay order, whereas quashing restores the position as it stood prior to the order quashed.[[S. 11, 12AA, 115BBC, 153A]

S. 153 : Assessment-Limitation-Final assessment order passed beyond time-limit prescribed under section 153(2)-No reference to Transfer Pricing Officer-Reassessment proceedings barred by limitation-Assessment order quashed. [S. 69, 144, 144C(13), 147, 148, 153(2)]

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Cash deposits during demonetisation period-Assessing Officer having made detailed enquiries regarding source of cash deposit and accepted explanation after verification-Principal Commissioner cannot invoke revision merely because he believes deeper enquiry was required-Revision unwarranted. [S. 143(2), 142(1)]

S. 9(1)(vii) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Fees for technical services-Non-resident –”Make available”-Receipts for centralised information technology support, data management and maintenance services-No technical knowledge, skill or process made available-Recipient unable to independently manage IT environment without continuous recourse to service provider-Not fees for included services-Not taxable in India-Remittances to India-Discrepancy between figures in Forms 15CA and 26AS-Matter remanded for verification.-DTAA-India-USA [S. 9(1)(vii)(b) , 115A, 263 ,Art. 12(4)]

S. 9(1)(i) : Income deemed to accrue or arise in India-Business connection-Non-resident-Permanent establishment-Liaison office treated as permanent establishment in earlier years-Assessee closing liaison office, no expatriate employees, evidence produced-Burden shifting on Revenue to rebut-No material brought by Department despite remand opportunity-No permanent establishment in India-No profits attributable-Royalty-Supply of software embedded in hardware-Facts same as earlier years where addition deleted following Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence (SC)-Royalty not taxable-DTAA-India-USA [[S. 9(1)(vii) 144C art.5, 12]

S. 37(1): Business expenditure-Accrued or contingent liability-Assessee in real estate business-Provision for construction expenses made on fair estimate of amount required for completion of project, following matching concept-Amount spent in subsequent year through proper banking channels, no discrepancies noticed by Revenue-Provision to be allowed.[S. 145]

S. 10A : Free trade zone-Export-oriented units-Condition that exports not less than 75% of total sales-“Export turnover” and “total turnover”-Expenses incurred in foreign exchange in providing technical services outside India excluded from both-75% of total sales to be computed on gross receipts. [S. 10A(2)(ia), 80HHC, 80HHE]

S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Powers-Jurisdictional validity of assessment order in question due to absence of transfer order under section 127-Commissioner (Appeals) passing order without adjudicating jurisdictional issue despite pending High Court directions-Matter restored to file of Commissioner (Appeals). [S. 127, 143(3), 144B]

S. 194LBC : Deduction of tax at source-Payments to investors in securitisation trust-Excess interest spread paid to originator by assessee, a securitisation trust-Originator not an “investor”-Not liable to deduct tax at source. [S. 115TCA, 201(1)]

S. 194LBC : Deduction of tax at source-Income in respect of investment in securitisation trust-Definitions of “investor” and “securitised debt instrument”-Originator not holding any pass-through certificates of securitisation trust-Where minimum retention requirement commitment is met via other permissible alternative, originator does not hold instrument in securitisation trust and cannot be reckoned as investor-Assessee not “assessee-in-default”. [S. 115TCA, 201(1), 201(1A)]