Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act, 2020.

S. 2(i)(j): Disputed tax-Pendency of appeal-Binding circular-Review pending before Supreme Court on specified date-Review petition was dismissed-Rejection application was set aside-Interpretation of taxing statutes Beneficial legislation requires purposive construction. [S. 2(1)(a)(i), ITAct,1961, S.119, Art, 226]

S. 276B : Offences and prosecutions-Failure to pay to the credit tax deducted at source-Summons to directors treating them as principal officers of assessee-Application for discharge-Trial court discharging accused directors on grounds that no notices issued and no documents produced to treat them as principal officers of assessee-Accused directors accepting delay in remittance of tax deducted in reply to notices from complainant-Defence cannot be raised at time of considering discharge application Material available to be considered at time of trial-Court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction when order suffers from illegality and incorrectness-Order was set aside. [S. 2(35), 276BB 278B, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 200, 245 Art. 226]

S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Property held for charitable purposes-Receipts from donors who deducted tax at source-No element of trade-Principle of consistency-No change in law or facts-Department cannot take different view without convincing reasons-Entitle to exemption-Rejection of revisional order was set aside. [S. 2(15) 11, 12,12A, 12AA, 13(8),80G, 194C, 194J, Art. 226]

S. 264 :Commissioner-Revision of other orders-Property held for charitable purposes-Receipts from donors who deducted tax at source-No element of trade-Principle of consistency-Entitle to exemption-Rejection of revisional order was set aside-SLP of revenue dismissed. [S. 2(15) 11, 12,12A, 12AA, 13(8),80G, 194C, 194J, Art. 136]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Assessing Officer issued questionnaire seeking comprehensive information regarding share capital transactions Assessee furnished required details and documents and adequate enquiries conducted by Assessing Officer-Power cannot be invoked without demonstrating failure of proper inquiry-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed. [S. 260A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Tribunal’s quashing of revision order relying on High Court decision on similar issue-Not erroneous-No substantial question of law.[S. 260A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Estimation of disallowance of purchase expenses-Assessing Officer accepting sale and purchase-Disallowing an estimated five per cent. of inflated amount-Revision order was quashed. [S. 37(1), 260A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Share capital and Share premium-Principal Commissioner invoking revision powers for second time on same issue involving share capital and share premium-Order of Tribunal quashing the revision order was affirmed.[S. 131, 254(1), 260A]

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-Capital gains-Principal Commissioner had applied his mind and had not relied merely on Assessing Officer’s proposal-Order of revision valid-Order of Tribunal set aside. [S. 10(38), 143(3), 260A]