S. 147 : Reassessment –Change of opinion- Deduction was allowed in the original assessment, on the same facts to hold that the excess deduction was allowed will be change of opinion therefore ,reassessment was held to be bad in law . [S.10A,148 ]

S. 145:Method of accounting – Developer –Percentage completion method – Accounting Standards AS-1, AS-7 & AS-9, the Guidance Note on Accounting for Real Estate Transactions issued by the ICAI- Percentage of revenue recognised by the CIT(A) was held to be justified. [ S. 145(2) ]

S. 145 : Method of accounting –Where then books of account is rejected and income is estimated , separate addition u/s 40A(3), 68 or peak credit cannot be made .[ S. 68. 145(3) ]

S. 145: Method of accounting -Valuation of stock — Opening and closing stock to be valued on same basis [ S. 143(3) ]

S.145: Method of accounting – Accrual — Mercantile system of accounting -Interest on fixed deposits-Interest accrued is taxable income and liable to tax as soon as it accrues .[ S.4 ,5 ]

S. 144 : Best judgment assessment –Road contractor-Order passed by the CIT(A) was incomplete matter was remanded to CIT(A) for reappraisal of material on record. [ S. 145 , 145(3) ]

S. 143(3): Assessment – Transfer pricing —Amalgamation —On the date of passing of draft assessment order , assessee company was merged with another company hence the order was held to be not sustainable [ S. 92D ]

S.143(3): Assessment- Undisclosed income –If admission is made in the course of search on the basis of material found in the course of search ,the retraction of such admission of undisclosed income is not permissible especially when the retraction is by the mother and not by the assesse [ S. 69A,132(4) ]

S. 143(3): Assessment- Survey- An admission of estimated income made during survey has no evidentiary value and is not binding on the assessee. The income has to be assessed as per the return of income and books of account. [ S. 133A ]

S.143(3): Assessment -Assessment order passed without considering relevant materials and objections raised by assessee was held to be arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice was quashed .[ Art 226 ]