Section 24 of the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 permits provisional attachment after a show-cause notice where the Initiating Officer has reason to believe property is benami, apprehends its alienation, and obtains prior approval. It prescribes no mandatory interval between notice, approval and attachment; same-day action is therefore not inherently mechanical. Cross-examination in summary proceedings is not automatic and requires a request demonstrating necessity. Benami status may be inferred cumulatively where acquisition funds remain unexplained and financial records, tax returns, inventories and banking transfers do not establish the ostensible owner's independent financial capacity. Such material may support confirmation of attachment where consideration is attributable to the beneficial owner.

Section 69 applies only where an assessee's investment and its source remain unsatisfactorily explained. Additional evidence admitted under Rule 29 established that residential property was jointly acquired and that each co-owner made payments through identifiable banking channels from explained sources. The agreement, developer receipts, co-owners' bank statements, TDS certificate and society share certificate did not establish that the assessee alone funded the entire investment. Accordingly, the investment could not be treated as unexplained in the assessee's hands, and the addition was deleted.

Cash deposits in specified bank notes claimed as festive-season sales may be treated as unexplained credits where sale invoices, item-wise stock records, stock availability and supporting operational evidence do not substantiate the source. Exceptional cash-sale volumes immediately before demonetisation and insufficient staffing or related expenditure may further undermine the sales explanation. Reduction of the gross-profit element from the addition avoids double taxation. The amendment to section 115BBE enhancing tax consequences operates prospectively absent express retrospective effect; it does not apply to Assessment Year 2017-18, for which sustained unexplained-credit additions are taxable at normal rates.

Skill-based online card-game winnings fall within taxable income and remain subject to the special tax treatment for winnings; the online mode and the game's skill-based character do not alter that treatment. Taxability, however, requires identification of real net winnings rather than aggregation of gross credits entering an online gaming wallet. Repeated wallet credits, debits and redeployment do not themselves establish taxable income. The restriction on deducting expenditure does not displace the prior requirement to determine whether an actual gain arose. Verified buy-in amounts must therefore be considered in determining net accretion, and a net loss does not create taxable winnings.

Agricultural-land exclusion from capital-gains taxation requires the taxpayer to establish actual agricultural use through cogent evidence; revenue records, acreage descriptions, or unsupported claims are insufficient. Section 50C permits adoption of the stamp valuation applicable to the same property and transfer where declared consideration is lower. Reference to the Departmental Valuation Officer is not required unless the taxpayer claims before the Assessing Officer that stamp value exceeds fair market value. Stamp-value computation must be confined to the verified extent actually transferred. Natural-justice objections fail where notice, participation, opportunity to respond, and appellate verification are available. A limited-scrutiny jurisdiction objection requires material showing examination of a wholly unconnected issue.

Treaty-based claims for refund of excess dividend distribution tax for foreign shareholders remain subject to the applicable India-Singapore treaty rate and the governing larger-Bench determination. Supporting facts already on record permit adjudication in line with that determination. Market research and media measurement costs are deductible as revenue expenditure under section 37(1) when incurred wholly and exclusively for advertising and media-planning services, evidenced by client agreements and invoices, and connected with revenue generation, business nexus and commercial expediency.

Penalty under Section 271AAA does not arise merely because physical stock of polished diamonds is lower than recorded book stock. Undisclosed income requires search material establishing income not recorded in the books. Where no search-based evidence proves that the stock discrepancy resulted from unrecorded sales or that sale consideration remained unaccounted for, the statutory conditions for penalty are not met. Confirmation of a quantum addition does not independently establish penalty liability, as penalty provisions require strict construction. The penalty was therefore deleted.

Redevelopment compensation paid for hardship and displacement while vacating a residential property is characterised as a non-taxable capital receipt, irrespective of its use for alternate accommodation or any erroneous partial income offer. Taxable salary cannot be determined solely from gross receipts in Form 26AS where employer-issued Form 16 and settlement records identify exempt gratuity and other components, absent contrary component-wise evidence. Deductions for donations and savings-bank interest remain allowable when supported by donation receipts, bank records, proper income disclosure, and compliance with the applicable eligibility and statutory-limit conditions.

Delayed electronic filing of Form 10B under section 12A(1)(b) is a procedural and evidentiary lapse, not a substantive failure, where the audit report was timely obtained, filed before the return deadline, and charitable exemption conditions are otherwise met. Such delay does not by itself defeat exemption under section 11; eligibility remains subject to verification and reconciliation with Form 10AC. The adjustment under section 143(1) did not breach natural justice where the variance schedule identified the delayed filing and the assessee had opportunities to address it during rectification and appellate proceedings.

Equivalent debenture subscriptions by an associated enterprise and an unrelated subscriber under substantially identical contractual terms, including a 15% interest rate, support use of the unrelated-party investment as a reliable internal comparable for arm's-length pricing. In the absence of material distinguishing facts, debt-equity recharacterisation producing a nil arm's-length price is not supported. Interest-limitation disallowance requires recomputation after verification of the correct associated-enterprise interest and EBITDA figures. Set-off of brought-forward business losses depends on verification of the eligible loss quantum, availability, and implementation of relevant appellate directions.

Natural justice requirements are met where statutory notices, replies, supporting material and a final opportunity are considered, with no identified material left unaddressed. Cash deposits lacking evidence of their source, repayment trail, cash book, withdrawals or deposit-wise reconciliation may be treated as unexplained money, attracting the consequential tax regime. Land-arrangement receipts reflect business income where ownership or acquisition of a capital asset is unproved and activities show commercial facilitation; unsupported refund claims do not create liabilities. GST disclosures are contemporaneous evidence of receipts unless rebutted through invoices, contracts, credit notes, ledgers or reconciliations. Tax treatment follows credible evidence and real commercial substance rather than unsupported labels or affidavits.

Section 56(2)(viib) applies where consideration is received for the issue of shares above fair market value. A securities-premium credit created solely by reclassifying compulsorily convertible preference shares under Ind-AS, without a fresh receipt during the year, does not constitute such consideration; taxing it may duplicate an earlier tax adjustment. A merchant banker's Discounted Cash Flow valuation prepared under Rule 11UA remains a prescribed basis for fair market value. Differences between projected and subsequent actual results alone do not invalidate that valuation or justify substituting the Net Asset Value Method when the valuer's competence and method are undisputed.

Section 69 unexplained-investment additions require a satisfactory explanation of the source of funds. Documentary confirmation of a gift, the donor's bank records evidencing liquidation of fixed deposits, and matching RTGS entries established the source and genuineness of funds applied to property investment; the addition was deleted. Bank debits, account credits, and the stated use of salary income and savings supported recurring mutual-fund contributions; that addition was also deleted. Credible documentary and banking evidence establishing funding sources prevents property and mutual-fund investments from being treated as unexplained.

Penalty proceedings for concealment of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars require a notice identifying the precise charge. Retaining both alternative limbs in a notice, without striking out the inapplicable limb, leaves the taxpayer unable to determine the alleged default. Under Sections 274 and 271(1)(c), this defect in initiation renders the notice invalid and prevents the consequential penalty order from being sustained. Clear communication of the applicable statutory basis is required before imposition of a penalty.

Interest earned by a co-operative credit society on its own funds temporarily placed in deposits with nationalised or scheduled banks is attributable to its business of providing credit facilities to members and qualifies for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i). "Attributable to" is broader than "derived from". Treatment as income from other sources does not apply where deposited funds are neither amounts payable to members nor other liabilities.

Cash gifts from relatives are not assessable as unexplained cash credits where the recipient establishes donor identity, transaction genuineness and basic creditworthiness. Donor confirmations responding to statutory notices, gift deeds, income-tax returns and financial statements satisfy the initial evidentiary burden. Revenue doubts concerning donors' own sources amount to requiring proof of the source of source and cannot, without independent material, establish that the gifts are the recipient's unexplained money. Comparisons between returned income and gift amounts, or mere suspicion, do not rebut recorded gifts. The gifts were satisfactorily explained, and the addition was deleted.

Reassessment limitation excludes the period allowed for responding to a Section 148A(b) notice when computing the period under the proviso to Section 149(1). Exclusion of the notice-reply period brought the reassessment notice within the applicable three-year period, making approval by the PCIT competent under Section 151(i). A political-party donation is not deductible under Section 80GGC merely because it was paid through banking channels and supported by a receipt. Investigation material showing funds routed through intermediaries and returned to donors established an accommodation-entry arrangement; absent credible rebuttal, the claimed deduction was unsustainable.

Section 80-IA(4) allows infrastructure-facility deductions for enterprises that develop, operate and maintain, or develop and operate qualifying facilities, subject to statutory conditions. EPC contractor status alone does not preclude developer eligibility; the substance of contractual responsibilities and activities governs. Responsibility for design, procurement, execution, testing, commissioning, maintenance, project risks, and deployment of technical and financial resources supports developer status. Where substantially identical claims were accepted in earlier years and no material factual or legal change exists, the deduction remains available and disallowance is deleted.

Clerical omission of income-from-other-sources particulars from a return schedule does not justify an unexplained-money addition where that income was included in taxable income and the related liability was paid through advance tax, tax deduction and self-assessment tax. Consistent disclosures in preceding and succeeding years support treatment of the omission as inadvertent. Directions allowing a Tribunal challenge without applying limitation, while excluding the pendency period of related proceedings, rendered the appeal maintainable when filed immediately after receipt of the relevant order. The unexplained-money addition was consequently set aside.

Cost of improvement in computing capital gains must be attributable to the capital asset or ownership interest transferred. Where jointly owned land is improved but an assessee transfers only a one-tenth interest, expenditure cannot be deducted in full merely because the assessee incurred it or other co-owners made no claim. Without a legally enforceable arrangement or cogent evidence entitling the assessee to set off the entire expenditure against proceeds from the individual share, deduction is restricted to the proportion corresponding to the transferred interest. Accordingly, only one-tenth of the improvement cost is allowable.