The Tribunal held that service tax paid under a partner’s registration can be adjusted against the firm’s liability. However, liability as a sub-contractor was upheld.
The High Court upheld deletion of ₹7.26 crore addition under Section 68 after finding that PAN, bank statements and audited financials established identity and creditworthiness. Suspicion without evidence was held insufficient.
The High Court set aside cancellation of GST registration and directed the petitioner to file all pending returns within 30 days. Arrears including tax, interest, and penalties remain payable.
Explains how Section 6 determines whether global or only Indian income is taxable. Highlights differences between ROR, RNOR, and Non-Resident status.
Explains how agricultural income is fully exempt under Section 10(1) but can impact tax rates on other income. Covers constitutional basis and partial integration rules.
ITAT Kolkata held that reassessment under Section 147 was invalid as it relied solely on existing records. In absence of new tangible material, reopening amounted to impermissible review.
With the growing trend of Indian professionals providing consultancy services to overseas clients, understanding the tax and regulatory implications has become essential. Cross-border consultancy is not just about earning in foreign currency—it involves careful compliance under GST, Income Tax, FEMA, and proper Accounting of foreign exchange transactions. This article provides a practical overview of the […]
The Reserve Bank of India has notified the “Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing and Lending) (First Amendment) Regulations, 2026” vide Notification No. FEMA 3(R)(5)/2026-RB dated 9th February 2026 effective immediately upon publication in the Official Gazette. The Reserve Bank of India hereby makes the following amendments to the Foreign Exchange Management (Borrowing and Lending) Regulations, 2018 […]
Allahabad High Court held that limitation cannot run from mere portal upload of an ex-parte order. The appellate authority must reconsider limitation where no proper communication was made.
Delhi High Court held reassessment under Sections 147/148 cannot be initiated merely on an internal audit objection. Absence of new tangible material made reopening invalid.
