S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue–No revision where Assessing Officer rightly made no disallowance under section 14A as interest-free funds exceeded investments-Commissioner cannot invoke section 263 on an issue which is the subject matter of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals)-Failure to refer specified domestic transaction to Transfer Pricing Officer does not render assessment erroneous where CBDT Instruction is not attracted. [S. 14A, 92BA, 92CA 250, Rule 8D]

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Where the AO, after examining the assessee’s eligibility for exemption under section 10(21), adopted a possible view that incidental receipts were eligible for exemption, the Commissioner could not invoke section 263 merely because he held a different opinion on a debatable issue. [S. 10(21)]

S. 263: Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-AO having accepted the claim that interest received on enhanced compensation formed part of compensation exempt under section 10(37), revision under section 263 was not justified as the issue was debatable and the AO had adopted a possible view. [S. 10(37), 45, 56(2)(viii)]

S. 244A: Refunds-Interest on refunds-Assessee entitled to interest up to date of actual receipt of refund.

S. 153A: Assessment-Search-No addition in unabated assessment in absence of incriminating material found during search. [S. 68, 69C]

S. 147: Reassessment-Reopening is invalid where the very same income has already been assessed substantively in the hands of another assessee, and the AO records only a contingent belief that the income may escape assessment if the other assessee succeeds in appeal-Contingent reopening was without jurisdiction and liable to be quashed. [S. 148]

S. 144C: Reference to dispute resolution panel-Limitation-Transfer Pricing order passed beyond the time limit prescribed under section 92CA(3A) is barred by limitation-Consequently, the assessee ceases to be an ‘eligible assessee’ under section 144C and the draft as well as final assessment orders are void ab initio. [S. 92CA(3A), 144C(15)(b)(i), 153]

S. 143(2): Assessment-Notice-Additional ground-Notice issued under section 143(2) contrary to the mandatory format prescribed by CBDT Instruction issued under section 119 is invalid-Consequently, the assessment based on such notice is liable to be quashed. [S.119, 143(3), 254(1)]

S. 92C: Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Management consultancy services-Internal CUP/Internal TNMM to be preferred over external comparables-Transfer pricing adjustment deleted-Transfer Pricing Officer not adopting any prescribed method-Adjustment unsustainable-Selection of comparables-Comparable engaged in similar line of business cannot be excluded. [S. 92CA, R. 10B]

S. 92C: Transfer pricing-Arm’s length price-Avoidance of tax-International transaction-Selection of Comparables-Companies having huge brand value, intangibles, R&D activities and related party transactions not comparable to captive software service provider-Working capital adjustment-Adjustment cannot be denied without assigning reasons-Assessee entitled to relief-TPO must adopt one of the prescribed statutory methods-Second attempt to rectify omission not permissible. [S.92CA, 92B]