S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -Consideration that arose in hands of HUF on sale of capital asset had been invested for purchase of new residential house in name of some of its members instead of assessee (HUF)- Deduction is allowable .[ S.45 ]

S.37(1): Business expenditure -Ad -hoc disallowance of 5% – Tribunal is justified in holding that where the assessee had furnished names and PAN numbers of all vendors to whom it had paid repair and maintenance charges for their services disallowance of ad-hoc disallowance of 5% of expenses is held to be not justified .

S. 36(1)(iii) :Interest on borrowed capital -loan amount was used for acquiring or construction of assets that were used for earning taxable income- Interest expenditure is allowable as deduction.

S. 28(i) : Business income -Income from other sources- Business of development of Bio-Tech Park, construction, leasing and sale of commercial properties, earned income from sub-lease of property and assessee’s business for development of Bio-Tech Park had already commenced, sub-lease income is assessable as business income and not as income from other sources .[ S.56 ]

S. 226 : Collection and recovery-Attachment—A sale is a contractual transaction-For a contract to be valid, it must be made by the free consent of parties competent to contract-In rule 16(1) of the Second Schedule to the Income-tax Act, 1961 it is expressly stated that the defaulter-assessee shall not be competent to deal with the propertyNotice ofdemand served on 5-1-2013 —Order of attachment on 21-12-2015 — Order relates back todate of notice of demand- Order of attachment is valid- Certain transfers to be void –Tax recovery Officer cannot declare transaction is null and void , it is the function of the civil court to declare a transaction null and void -The Tax Recovery Officer clearly erred in declaring the transactions to which the petitioner was a party null and void. [S. 281, Second Schedule, Rule 2, 11]

S. 271(1)(c) : Penalty–Concealment–False claim of depreciation-Levy of penalty is justified. [S. 32]

S. 92C : Transfer pricing-Comparable-Mere dissatisfaction with the findings of facts arrived at by the Tribunal is not a substantial question of law – Appeal was dismissed.[S. 260A]

S. 80IB(10) : Housing projects- Construction of approach road and permission for user of land for housing project – Entitle to exemption.

S. 68 : Cash credits—Share application and share premium- Identity of creditors, creditworthiness and genuineness of transactions established—Addition cannot be made.

S. 32 : Depreciation –Charitable Trust-Entitle to depreciation. [S.11 ]