Join our webinar on July 24-25 for an in-depth analysis of Union Budget 2024. Learn about tax proposals, sector impacts, and investment insights. Register now!
Join CA Sachin Jain for a live course on Input Tax Credit from a litigation perspective. Gain practical insights and master ITC complexities. Register now!
An interesting tug-of-war between the taxpayer and Government is already emerging and likely to escalate over coming years on the issue of applicability of interest rate @18%/24% p.a for non-reflection of Input Tax Credit in GSTR-2A/GSTR2B.
All hear about electric vehicles (EV) and their future role in decarbonizing the transport sector. Equally true is our anxiety to learn about the infrastructure development for EVs and whether we are serious about its implementation. Who are the stakeholders in developing the infrastructure for EVs? NITI Aayog in association with the Ministry of power, […]
India has always been one of largest exporting countries all around the world. With new emerging policies in India regarding exports, people are moving towards export business which helps our Indian economy and GDP to grow at a faster rate. Here we will talk about various aspects of taxation in case of export of services (including- GST, Transfer Pricing provisions, Income Tax).
GST Law’s backbone is the free flow of input credit. This allows for tax-free transactions and eliminates cascading effects. Section 17(5) of 2017 CGST Act defines certain Goods and Services as Blocked Credit. This means that a taxable person cannot claim Input Tax Credit ( ITC ) for the goods or services listed under section 17(5) of the CGST Act 2017.
What is Decentralized Finance. ♦ Global open alternative to the current financial system. ♦ DeFi will let you borrow, save, invest, trade and other related financial services. ♦ It is based on open source technology that everyone can access the financial using internal connect and apps to access these products. ♦ With DeFi market are […]
The enactment of GST Law has marked 4 years and yet the most buzzing issue that has always been in talks is Transitional Credit be it the availment or the retrospective amendment of Section 140 or the refund of the cess. Of late various rulings/judgements have come into picture on the issue of refund of […]
1. Background of Debate Effectuated December 2016, the Sick Industrial Companies Act[1] was repealed to pave way to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016[2] (hereinafter “IBC”). The objects of the two acts were different in one substantial aspect: the latter focused on reviving a company so as it continues to survive as a going concern, aimed to act as a beneficial legislation and not merely focused on recovery. Recovery however being quintessential to IBC we saw that it and the Limitation Act, 1963[3] (hereinafter “Limitation Act”), which bars the right to recover money claims after a time lapse of 3 years from the cause of action, came face to face with each other and so became a long debate culminating finally this year. This debate arose on two counts. First, IBC was always meant to be a complete code in itself, an exhaustive code on the subject matter[4] and so the remedies given thereunder comprehensively cover all matters that it apprehends. Thus, it was naturally understood that IBC is not guided by any other legislative enactment. However it does not have a clause expressly barring application of limitation act which attracts Section 29 of the limitation act which brings us to the second. Second, the mandate of Section 29 of the Limitation Act makes it abundantly clear that all legislative enactments are to be guided by the Limitation Act “unless such enactment expressly excludes itself”. Now, even the words “expressly excluded” in the section have been interpreted to have a wider import by the Supreme Court (hereinafter “SC”) giving itself the power to interpret by reading of all the provisions of an act to infer such exclusion[5]. The interpretation of such an intention or otherwise rested again with the apex court. 2. Prior to Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Act, 2018 Initially the NCLT held in Neelkanth Township and Construction Pvt. Ltd. v Urban Infrastructure Trustee Ltd.[6] that the “provisions of the IBC cannot be shackled by the Limitation Act”. The court noted: “There is nothing on the record that Limitation Act, 2013 is applicable to IBC. Learned Counsel for the appellant also failed to lay hand on any of the provision of IBC to suggest that the Law of Limitation Act is applicable. The IBC, 2016 is not an Act for recovery of money claim, it relates to the initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. If there is a debt which includes interest and there is default of debt and having a continuous course of action, the argument that the claim of money by Respondent is barred by Limitation cannot be accepted.” The NCLAT based its decision on the observation in Innoventive Industries Limited v ICICI Bank & Anr [7] that IBC is a comprehensive code which implies that it is independent of other laws. Now even though there was no provision in IBC that expressly barred the Limitation Act, the court observed that it remains open for the court to conclude so on a meaningful and comprehensive reading of the provisions. This view was further supported by M/S. Speculum Plast Pvt. Ltd. v Ptc Techno Pvt. Ltd[8]. and B.K. Educational Services Private Limited v Parag Gupta.[9] Even so, acting cautiously, the courts prescribed that the underlying utility of the doctrines like that of limitation must not be forsaken and it must be ensured that a deliberate delay does not go unpunished. Undoubtedly, the above ruling was bound to result in an increase in the number of applications and appeals. In the above background the Report of the Insolvency Law Committee of March 2018[10] came in which opined that “since the intent of the Code was not to array the Code as a fresh opportunity for creditors and claimants who did not exercise their remedy under existing laws within the prescribed limitation period, the Committee thought it fit to insert a specific section applying the Limitation Act to the Code”. The legislature finally taking note of this situation came up with Section 238A inserted vide an amendment[11] which clearly provided that the Limitation Act would apply to all the proceedings or appeals before the NCLT, NCLAT, DRT and DRAT.
In a major move aimed at boosting exports and offering relief to exporters, the government on 17th August 2021 notified Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products (RoDTEP) (guidelines) as part of the Chapter 4 provisions of the Foreign Trade Policy 2015-20– Notification No. 19/ 2015-20 dated 17 August 2021 to replace the Merchandise […]
As the world moves increasingly towards economic integration and globalization there is a lot of cross border trade, investment and business which will only increase as more and more developing and least developed countries open up their borders for more business with the international community.
United Construction Co. Vs Union of India (Delhi High Court) 1. Delhi HC has issued notice and directed the Secretary, Revenue to file an affidavit as to why FORMS GSTR-2 and GSTR-3 have not been made operational despite the CGST having come into force four years ago. 2. The High Court noted that non-uploading of […]
