S. 68: Cash credits -Bogus share capital- Authorities have not done even the bare minimum for verifying the genuineness of the transaction- Casual approach cannot be subscribed on our part- Matter is set aside for indepth verification . [ S.133(6)]

S.68: Cash credits – Appeal -Supreme Court- Pricipal Officer- Bogus share capital-Ex-parte order – Service of notice- Authorised representative – Recall of ex-parte order-A power of attorney holder is an agent and Principal Officer u/s 2(35)-If a Chartered Accountant is granted a Power of attorney holder service upon him of a notice is valid- If a notice is duly served upon the litigant through its authorized representative, and it was provided sufficient opportunity to appear before the Court and contest the matter but the litigant choses to let the matter proceed ex parte, the order cannot be recalled. [S. 2(35) 261, 262 , 282, 288, Art . 136 ]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes -Sports -Cricket – The commercial exploitation of the popularity of the game and the property/infrastructure held by the assessee is not incidental to the main object but is one of the primary motives of the assessee- Not entitle to exemption- Matter reamended to the file of the AO to ascertain the mutuality in respect of club income . [ S.2(15), 12A ]

S. 11 : Property held for charitable purposes – Charitable activities results in a surplus does not mean that assessee exists for profit- If the surplus is ploughed back into the same charitable activities, the assessee cannot be said to be carrying out commercial activities in the nature of trade, commerce or business- Entitle to exemption . [ S.2(15) 12, 12AA ]

S. 10(38) : Long term capital gains from equities – Penny stocks- Burden is on the revenue to show with evidence the chain of events and live link of the assessee’s involvement in the scam including that he paid cash and in return received exempt Long term capital gains -Denial of exemption is held to be not jaustified-Addition cannot be made as unexplained income- Addition cannot be made on estimated commission for alleged accommodation entries . [ S.45 , 68,69C ]

S. 2(7A) : Assessing Officer – Jurisdiction- The Addl CIT is an Assessing Officer, he can act as such only if there is a notification issued by the CBDT u/s 120(4)(b) or if there is an order u/s 127 transferring jurisdiction from the DCIT to the Addl CIT -In the absence of either, the assessment order is without jurisdiction and has to be quashed as null and void- No estoppel against the law- Additional ground of assessee on jurisdictional issue is allowed . [ S. 2(28c ),120(4) 127 , 254(1) ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue –
– Furnishing of Form 3CEB report electronically is mandatory as per Rule 12(2)- Revision order is held to be valid- For failure to deduct tax at source in respect of freight charges paid – Revision is held to be not valid . [ S.92E, 172 , 194C, 195 , R.12 , form 3CEB ]

S. 263 : Commissioner – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue – Method of accounting construction contract – Completion method – Allocation of expenses -Accounting standard AS-7 – Revision is held to be not justified .

S. 251 : Appeal – Commissioner (Appeals) – Powers – Order passed with in month of conclusion of hearing , though dispatched after 3 months cannot be said to be null and void .

S. 54 : Capital gains – Profit on sale of property used for residence -Purchase of two adjacent flats – Could be treated as one residential house – Matter remanded for verification .[S.45 ]