The Supreme Court rejected the Revenue’s appeal solely on limitation, holding that the delay explanation was inadequate. The ruling highlights strict adherence to timelines in filing SLPs.
The case examined validity of a show cause notice covering several years. The court held that GST law requires year-wise assessment, making such consolidated notices invalid.
The Court held that the present case was identical to an earlier ruling and could not be distinguished. It disposed of the appeal in line with the prior judgment, ensuring consistency in decisions.
The Court held that invocation of the bank guarantee after expiry of the defect liability period was arbitrary. It ruled that absence of defects and delay invalidated the encashment action.
The Court held that the secured creditor’s rights were limited to project receivables and did not extend to management or contractual control. It ruled that the creditor could not challenge termination of the contract. The decision clarifies limits of secured creditor rights under IBC and SARFAESI.
The Court addressed whether additional remuneration taxed at the firm level can be taxed again in the hands of the partner. It directed CBDT to clarify the issue and stayed recovery proceedings. The ruling highlights concerns over potential double taxation.
GSTN has enabled editing of the pre-deposit percentage in APL-01 filings. The change allows taxpayers flexibility, while verification remains with the appellate authority.
Income Tax Department Ministry of Finance, Government of India DTAA & FTC Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) & Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) & Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) Introduction The Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) is an agreement between India and other countries to avoid double taxation, ensure the exchange of […]
This explains the new block assessment mechanism allowing ALP to apply across multiple years. It emphasizes reduced disputes and streamlined compliance under prescribed conditions.
The issue concerns arrangements structured primarily to obtain tax benefits. It was held that such arrangements can be disregarded or recharacterised under GAAR to neutralise tax avoidance.
