S. 48 : Capital gains – Computation -Difference between market value and consideration declared, burden is on the revenue to prove -Addition was deleted [S. 45,52(1) ]

S.45:Capital gains — Shares purchased was pledged with bank – Actual date of transfer is when shares were delivered by bank to entity in subsequent assessment year. [ S.48 ]

S. 40(b)(v) : Amounts not deductible – Partner – Remuneration – Interest earned on investment of surplus money is not part of business income for computing the remuneration to partners – Disallowance was held to be justified .[ S.56 ]

S. 12AA : Procedure for registration –Trust or institution- Providing mid-day meals at Village Schools is charitable purpose which is entitle to registration . [ S.2(15) ]

S. 10 (23C): Exemption- Approval granted is held to be valid till it is withdrawn -Amount spent on the object was held to be allowable .[ S. 10(23C)(iv) ]

Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 -Finance Act, 2016 ( 2016) 384 ITR 1 (St) (IDS)

S.187: Time for payment of tax -Power to extend the payment of tax – CBDT has the power to condone the delay in depositing the tax .Matter remanded to CBDT to consider the request of the assessee. [ S.119, 183, 184 ]

Wealth tax -Act , 1957

S.7: Net wealth- Value of assets- Valuation of all assets and the valuation operated not on a year-to-year basis but for a four year cycle. The only exception was that where jewellery included gold or silver or any other alloy, the valuation of gold had to be undertaken annually- Deletion of addition was held to be justified .[ Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, 18 , 19 ]

S. 271AAA : Penalty – Search initiated on or after 1st June, 2007 –Manner in which undisclosed income earned was not satisfied -Deletion of penalty was held to be not valid [S. 132(4) ]

S.260A:Appeal -High Court- Procedure for registration –Trust or institution-In appeal High Court cannot direct the Commissioner to grant the registration for earlier years .[ S.12AA ]

S. 254(2):Appellate Tribunal-Rectification of mistake apparent from the record-Excessive delay by the Tribunal in passing judgement shakes the confidence of the litigants. orders have to be passed invariably within three months of the completion of hearing of the case. The delay is incurable. Even administrative clearance cannot cure the delay. Such decisions rendered after 3 months reflect a mistake apparent from the record and have to be recalled and the appeals heard afresh .[ R.34(5)]