Karnataka High Court held that during the pendency of proceedings u/s. 210 of the Companies Act, 2013, Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) can be assigned with the investigation, u/s. 212 of the Companies Act.
Calcutta High Court held that the provisions of old regime of Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (including TOLA) cannot be applied to new regime applicable from 01.04.2021. Accordingly, impugned notices quashed being barred by limitation.
NCLT Hyderabad held that the provisions of the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) override the provisions of the State enacted law, such as, Andhra Pradesh Revenue Recovery Act, 1864.
ITAT Mumbai held that exclusion of comparables for the reason that those companies are loss making or low profit making is not correct. Accordingly, TPO directed to include these comparables and re-compute the Arm’s Length Price (ALP).
Uttarakhand High Court held that invocation of proceedings u/s. 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 for minor infraction i.e. for not carrying any delivery challan unjustified as there is no intention to evade tax.
Delhi High Court held that unauthorized outward remittance by forged Form 15CB certificates has not fulfilled the ingredients of the offence of money laundering as there is no “proceeds of crime” being generated from scheduled offence i.e. fabrication of Form 15CB certificates.
NCLAT Delhi held that advance is an operational debt. Thus, appellant’s claim rightly held to be operational debt by the Resolution Professional hence appeal dismissed.
NCLT Delhi held that ‘financial debt’ is not barred by limitation. Accordingly, application filed by the CFM Asset Reconstruction Private Limited, the Financial Creditor, u/s. 7 of the Code for initiating CIRP against M.G. Finvest Private Limited, the Corporate Debtor, stands admitted.
ITAT Mumbai held that the activity of the trust for publishing advertising in the newspaper is intrinsically linked for newspaper activity falls within the ambit of sub-clause (i) of Subsection 2(15) and conditions imposed in sub-clause (ii) of the proviso has to be fulfilled.
ITAT Delhi held that subscription, professional and training services rendered by the assessee do not fall within the definition of FTS under India-Netherland DTAA and, therefore, cannot be taxed in India.
