S. 288 : Appearance by authorised representative –Duties – Appellate Tribunal – Adjournment sought by Departmental Representative – Statement of loss of trust in the Bench – Conduct held wholly unacceptable – Revenue representative duty bound to assist Tribunal – Matter adjourned with direction for proper representation. [S. 254(1)]

S. 151 : Reassessment – Sanction for issue of notice – Sanction of specified authority – Notice issued beyond three years from end of relevant assessment year – Approval obtained from Pr.CIT instead of Pr.CCIT/CCIT – Invalid assumption of jurisdiction – Reassessment quashed. [ S. 144, 147 , 148, 148A(d), 151(ii) ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Long-term capital gains on equity-oriented funds – Annual letting value of properties – Non-initiation of penalty proceedings – Where AO had examined the details and taken a possible view, revision was not justified. [S. 45, 112A, 14A, 23, 24(b), 143(3), 271C]

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence – Development agreement – Indexed cost of acquisition – Assessee entitled to indexation on entire property and not restricted to 22.5% land share – Multiple floors in same redeveloped building constitute one residential house – Deduction u/s 54 allowable.[ S.2(47), 45 , 48 ]

S. 271E : Penalty-Repayment of loan or deposit-Reasonable cause-Bona fide transaction duly reflected in books-No intention to evade tax-Penalty not sustainable. [S. 269T, 273B]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty-Concealment-Inadvertent data feeding mistake in the return-Audit report-Voluntary disclosure of the income-Penalty deleted. [S. 44B, 115JB, 139(5)]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Survey-Lack of proper enquiry-Specific show-cause notice-Excess stock-Principal CIT unjustified in invoking revisionary jurisdiction-Tribunal order affirmed. [S. 69, 115BBE, 133A, 260A]

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Review-Order passed on concession given by counsel-Review not maintainable. [S. 260A(7), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 47, R. 1]

S. 260A : Appeal-High Court-Cross objections-Right of respondent-assessee to file cross-objections-The right to prefer cross-objections is statutorily recognised by S. 253(4), Parliament chose not to confer such a right upon a respondent in an appeal referable to the former-Legislative silence may sometimes resonate louder than express words and which may be either ambiguous or capable of more than one interpretation-Cross objection not maintainable . [S.253 (4), 256(1), 260A(3), 260A(4), 260A(6), 260A(7), Civil Procedure Code, 1908,S.100, Order XLI R. 22]