S.271D: Penalty – Takes or accepts any loan or deposit- Acceptance of Loan in cash in excess of specified limits- Deletion of penalty based on entries alone- Matter remanded to Tribunal for fresh consideration. [ S.158BC, 269SS ]

S. 260A:Appeal –High Court- Transfer pricing – Determination of arm’s length price is question of fact- High Court Will not interfere unless finding is perverse [ S.92C. ]

S. 245D : Settlement Commission – No power to waive tax or interest which are statutorily payable —Settlement Commission is vested with power to rectify mistake —Interest is payable up to date of o0rder of Settlement Commission.[ S. 154, 234A,234B, 245D(4), 245F(1) ]

S. 222 : Collection and recovery – Attachment of immovable property on 27-10-2016—Company in liquidation – Sale of immovable properties by auction under provisions of code on 31-1-2018 — Income-Tax Department cannot claim priority of debt — Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016,shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law – Sale is valid. [S.178, 247,281, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, S,238]

S. 197 : Deduction at source – Certificate for lower rate –Wrong averment in the petition- The petitioner was allowed to withdraw the petition and granted liberty to file a fresh petition on payment of cost of Rs. 75,000. Court observed that ; any party who approaches the court seeking a prerogative writ in extraordinary writ jurisdiction, must come with clean hands. The least that is expected of a petitioner is that he would not misstate or misrepresent or suppress material facts or indulge in suppressio veri. The petition should reveal utmost good faith. The petitioner must ensure that every statement made in the petition, which is a sworn statement, is correct and honest. In case a party breaches this basic obligation, the court is duty-bound to dismiss the petition to ensure that the process of court is not abused by dishonest litigants. [ Art. 226 ]

S. 163 : Representative assessees – Non-Resident — Transfer of shares in Foreign Country by non-resident company — No evidence that assessee was party to transfer — Notice seeking to treat assessee as agent of non-resident is not valid- High Court has power to quash show-cause notice . [ S. 160, 161, 162 , Art. 226]

S. 147 : Reassessment –Notice based on the audit objection is not valid .[ S.148 ]

S. 147 : Reassessment –With in four years-No failure to disclose truly all material facts- Re examination of claim on the basis of breach of condition for claiming deduction in another assessment year is not valid .[ S.80IB(10), 148 ]

S.147: Reassessment-After the expiry of four years- Survey – Return filed in response to notice u/s 148 was accepted by t6he Assessing Officer after disallowance of certain expenses- No new material or information- Reopening is bad in law. [ S.133A, 148 ]

S. 80IA :Industrial undertakings –No requirement that Industrial Park should be operational before stipulated time — Refusal of approval because it was not operational is held to be not valid- The order and notification, withdrawing the earlier notification of 2007 was quashed.