S. 147 : Reassessment-Notice issued beyond six years from the end of relevant AY.2009-10-Limitation-Reopened based on the subsequent decision of the Appellate Tribunal–The limitation of six years under S. 149, must be alive on the date of passing of the order of CIT(A). In the present case since, as on 05.10.2011, the time limit for reopening of assessment for A.Y. 2009-10 had not lapsed, the order of the ITAT was well within the limitation- Notice of reassessment is valid -Petition is dismissed. [S. 80IC, 148, 150, 254(1), Art.226 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment–The stay is operating against passing of the final assessment order -Stay the assessment proceedings is dismissed. [S. 143(2), 148, 158BC, Art.226]

S. 143(2) : Assessment-Notice-Notice under S.143(2) of the Income Tax Act was never issued to the Assessee before initiating of proceedings under Section 158 BC of the Income Tax Act- Order is held to be bad in law. [S. 158BB, 158BC, 260A]

S. 139D : Return in electronic form–No provision for filing manual return- Setoff of carried forward loss-Directed to make representation to CBDT-The issue raised by the petitioner does not appear to be an issue only in an individual case, but may affect the whole body of the assessees’ (whose claim may not fit in the prescribed proforma). Thus, a clarification on this issue by the CBDT may be beneficial to the entire body of assessee, in fact, who seek to make a claim which according to them, the prescribed proforma does not provide for. [S. 50, 71, 72, 119, 139(1), 139(9), Art.226]

S. 127 : Power to transfer cases–Mumbai to Pune-Violation of natural justice–Various statements referred by the PCIT was neither provided to the petitioner nor referred in the show cause notice-As the principle of natural justice is violated–Transfer order is quashed.

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue– Interest adjusted against project expenditure-AO putting specific question and accepting the explanation-Revision is held to be not valid. [S. 145]

S. 254(2) : Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record–High court admitting department appeal on same issue-Review of order is impermissible. [S. 260A, 271AA, 271(1)(c)]

S. 143(2) : Assessment–Notice-Notice issued to wrong address- Department acknowledging mistake and serving notice by affixture at correct address-Service by affixture not permissible and could not be taken into account-Notice invalid and assessment is void ab initio. [S.143(3), 282, 292BB]

S. 56 : Income from other sources–Valuation of shares-Share premium-Addition on account of excess share premium unjustified. [S.56(2)(viib), R.11UA]

S. 49 : Capital gains-Previous owner-Cost of acquisition– Acquisition of immovable asset by succession of partnership- Subsequent amendment with retrospective effect providing for cost to be taken as cost to previous owner-Law prevailing at the time of filing of return applicable and not provision amended with retrospective effect. [S. 45, 49(iii)(e)]