CBDT’s 2026 amendment strengthens grandfathering protection for investments made before the commencement of GAAR. The clarification addresses concerns created by the Tiger Global ruling regarding scrutiny of legacy investments.
The Court clarified that an NGTP or non-genuine taxpayer tag is only a risk indicator and not conclusive proof against buyers. Authorities must conduct proper enquiry, examine records, and provide transaction-wise findings before rejecting ITC claims.
Gujarat HC upheld Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, allowing denial of ITC where suppliers fail to deposit GST with the government.
The Court held that blocking of the electronic credit ledger under Rule 86A cannot continue beyond the statutory one-year period. It clarified that such restriction automatically lapses by operation of law regardless of pending departmental proceedings.
The Tribunal held that TDS entries appearing in Form 26AS are sufficient material for reopening assessments when no return is filed. The ruling emphasizes that taxpayers must reconcile Form 26AS with books and returns to avoid reassessment proceedings.
The Income-tax Department intensified scrutiny of charitable entities after finding high surplus margins, premium pricing, and commercial-style operations. The developments show that institutions functioning like businesses may lose tax exemptions despite charitable registration.
The new law treats gains from depreciable assets as short-term capital gains for all purposes, not merely for computation. This effectively removes exemption benefits previously allowed through judicial interpretation under the old regime.
This case explains how foreign digital services like hosting fall under OIDAR and become taxable imports under GST. It highlights compliance through Reverse Charge Mechanism and ITC eligibility for registered businesses.
This case explains how GST law overrides mutuality by treating associations and members as distinct taxable persons. It clarifies that internal transactions like membership fees now qualify as taxable supply.
Explains when a lawyer’s refusal crosses into professional misconduct, especially in cases of discrimination or collective boycotts, and reinforces the duty to ensure access to justice.
