S. 147 : Reassessment – After the expiry of four years- Share capital – At the stage of re-opening, only a reason to believe should exist with regard to escapement of income. Definite conclusion would be drawn after raising queries upon the assessee in the light of S. 68 of the Act- Reopening is held to be justified -Sanction -Not required to provide elaborate reasons while approving the sanction -Succession – No requirement to issue two separate notices in name of amalgamated company as successor-in-interest of amalgamating company and to amalgamating company in its individual capacity, [ S.68, 148 ,151 170, Art , 226 ]

S. 56: Income from other sources -Consideration for issue of shares- Excess of the face value of shares- Market value – Method of valuation- The Assessee has the choice to choose a prescribed method for ascertaining the market value of the shares transferred- If the assessee has chosen one method of valuation provided under Rule 11UA (i.e. DCF method), the AO has no power or jurisdiction to change that method to another method- Addition is deleted . [ S.56(2) (viib) , R.11UA ]

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-Change of opinion – No new tangible material – “freebies” to doctors – sales promotion expenses -The code of conduct prescribed by the Medical Council is applicable only to medical practitioners/ doctors registered with the MCI and does not apply to pharmaceutical companies & the healthcare sector in any manner- Reassessment is held to be not valid . [ S.37(1), 148 ]

S. 40(a)(ia): Amounts not deductible – Deduction at source – Failure to deduct tax at source – Payment exceeding Rs 20,000 to each truck owners – Contract with a cement factory to transport cement with truck owners is a sub-contractor- – Disallowance is not limited only to amount outstanding and this provision equally applies in relation to expenses that had already been incurred and paid by assessee- S. 40(a)(ia) as introduced by Finance (No.2) Act, 2004 with effect from 1-4-2005 is applicable to and from assessment year 2005-06- Disallowance is held to be justified . [ S. 40A(3) , 194C ]

S. 37(1) : Business expenditure –”freebies” to doctors – sales promotion expenses -The code of conduct prescribed by the Medical Council is applicable only to medical practitioners/ doctors registered with the MCI and does not apply to pharmaceutical companies & the healthcare sector in any manner-Expenditure is held to be allowable -Re assessment with in four years – Change of opinion – Held to be not valid [ S 371(1) , Explanation, .147 , 148 ]

S. 260A : Appeal – High Court – High court shall formulate question and may then pronounce judgment either by answering question in affirmative or negative – If High Court wishes to hear appeal on any other substantial question of law not formulated by it, it may, for reasons to be recorded, formulate and hear such questions if it is satisfied that case involves such question. [ S. 4, , 28(ii)(a), Code of Civil Procedure 1908, S.100 ]

S.28(ii) (a): Business income – Compensation -Capital or revenue – Capital gains- Restrictive covenant as to non-competition – Held to be not taxable -.Prior to assessment year 2013-14 [ S. 2 (47) , 4, 28(va) ]

S. 9(1)(i): Income deemed to accrue or arise in India – Business connection – Income attributable to permanent establishment -Project office in India cannot be construed as fixed place hence cannot be considered as permanent establishment- Deletion of addition by the High Court is affirmed – DTAA- India -Republic of Korea [ Art.5 (1), 7 ]