S. 32 : Depreciation-Written-down value-Block of assets-Amalgamation-Approval of Central Government under S. 72A not required where assessee is not claiming carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation but only adopting correct WDV of amalgamating company’s assets. [S. 2(11), 32(2), 43(6), 72A]

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution-Cancellation of registration-Principal CIT need not await a decision of the assessing authority concerned before passing an order cancelling the registration-Order of the Tribunal is set aside and appeals are remanded back to the Tribunal for a fresh consideration. [S 12A, 254(1)]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes-Cricket association-Applicability of proviso to S. 2(15)-Matter is remitted to the authority concerned to decide the same afresh in view of the ratio decided by the apex Court in Asstt. CIT (E) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (2022) 329 CTR 297 (SC). [S. 2(15), 260A]

Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015

S. 10(1) : Undisclosed Foreign Assets – Assets acquired prior to commencement of the Act – Settlement Commission – Proceedings cannot continue once dispute is settled under Chapter XIX-A of the Act . [ Income -tax Act 1961 , S. 148 , 245C, Art. 226 ]

Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Act , 2020.

S.2(1)(j): Disputed tax—Interest- Department appeal before Tribunal – Assessee is liable to pay the amount of differential tax but also the interest paid to the assessee under s. 244A of the Act . [ S. 2(1)(o), 244A Art. 226 ]

Direct Tax Vivad Se Viswas Act , 2020.

S. 2(1)(a) : Declarant – Rejection of declaration – Pendency of writ petition treated as pendency of appeal – Tax arrears – CBDT FAQ/Circular not binding on Court – Declaration under DTVSV Act maintainable – Application directed to be processed. [S. 2(1)(h), 2(1)(j), 2(1)(o), 3, Art. 226]

S. 148A: Reassessment – Conducting inquiry, providing opportunity before issue of notice – Reassessment notice issued after 29.03.2022 by Jurisdictional AO instead of Faceless AO is without jurisdiction and void ab initio- DRP cannot ignore binding jurisdictional High Court ruling in Hexaware Technologies Ltd-Refusal to follow jurisdictional precedent is impermissible- The Court also cautioned the tax authorities that continued disregard of binding jurisdictional precedents may invite contempt action. [S.144C , 147, 148 151A , Art. 226 ].

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – CSR Contributions – Tied-up Grants – CSR contributions received by a charitable trust as an implementing agency, with specific donor restrictions and monitoring, are in the nature of tied-up grants – Delay in filing Form 10 for accumulation is a technical lapse, and where bona fide hardship is shown, such delay deserves condonation in the interest of substantial justice- The Tribunal directed the assessee to seek CBDT condonation and remitted the matter to the AO for fresh consideration. [ S. 2(24)(iia), Form No 10. ]

S. 69 :Unexplained investments -Addition for alleged “on-money” paid for purchase of jewellery solely on the basis of statement of third party and documents found in search of another person, without any incriminating material found in assessee’s search and without corroboration, is unsustainable – Assessee cannot be asked to prove a negative – Addition cannot be made merely on conjectures and surmises. [ S. 132, 132(4), 153A ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
Charitable trust – Limited scrutiny – Payments to specified persons u/s 13(3) – AO having made detailed enquiries and accepted explanation, PCIT cannot set aside assessment merely for “further verification” without himself recording how order is erroneous – Inadequate enquiry is not enough – PCIT must establish error by own enquiry – Revision quashed. [ S. 12A, 13(3) , 142(1) ]