Photo of S.R. Patnaik

S.R. Patnaik

Subscribe to S.R. Patnaik's Posts

Head and Partner in the Tax Practice at the Delhi NCR office of Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas. Mr. Patnaik specialises in various aspects of direct tax, such as international tax, transfer pricing, corporate tax etc. He can be reached at sr.patnaik@cyrilshroff.com

From courtrooms to clicks: Rethinking why simple GST rectifications require Court intervention

The Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) regime was introduced with the promise of a seamless, technology-driven tax system aimed at reducing cascading effects and ensuring smooth compliance. However, after seven years of its introduction, businesses and taxpayers have found themselves burdened with the rigidity of a tax regime, which makes the subsequent correction of even the smallest of clerical errors in returns quite difficult and requires litigation to have them rectified. Continue Reading From courtrooms to clicks: Rethinking why simple GST rectifications require Court intervention

AMT: Does It Impose Additional Taxes Under Income Tax Bill, 2025?

Background

The Alternate Minimum Tax (“AMT”) has its genesis in the Minimum Alternate Tax (“MAT”), which was introduced to ensure that taxes were paid by even those companies that intended to avoid payment of taxes by engaging in ingenuous tax planning methods despite having earned significant amount of book profits. These companies, called “zero-tax companies”, while reporting significant book profits, paid minimal or no income tax by leveraging various exemptions and deductions available under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”). Continue Reading AMT: Does It Impose Additional Taxes Under Income Tax Bill, 2025?

GST liability on the benefits arising out of land: The conundrum continues

The applicability of Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) on various land-related rights has been a subject of ongoing debate, leading to uncertainty for businesses, developers, and policymakers. While the GST framework seeks to tax the supply of goods and services, transactions involving land and immovable property present unique challenges due to their distinct legal nature.Continue Reading GST liability on the benefits arising out of land: The conundrum continues

Legal debate at tipping point over Notification extending GST deadline

The legal validity of the contentious CGST Notification No. 56/2023 (“Notification“), is facing challenges across multiple High Courts in India. The Notification, issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), extended the timeline for passing orders under Section 73(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act“) for financial years 2018-19 and 2019-20.Continue Reading Legal debate at tipping point over Notification extending GST deadline

Tax reassessment proceedings: Supreme Court puts TOLA controversy to rest

The Supreme Court (“SC”) recently addressed the validity of reassessment notices in Rajeev Bansal[1], issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”), from April 1, 2021, to June 30, 2021, even though the reassessment regime had been overhauled with effect from April 1, 2021. The Revenue argued that these notices fell under the Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation of Certain Provisions) Ordinance, 2020 (“TOLA”), which relaxed the time limits for reassessment due to the COVID-19 pandemic (“Pandemic”). However, several High Courts, including the Allahabad and Gujarat High Courts,[2] had ruled that such notices were subject to the new reassessment provisions introduced by the Finance Act, 2021, and hence, without the applicability of TOLA, were time-barred. The SC, in this landmark decision, ruled in favour of the Revenue, by upholding the validity of TOLA and laid down several jurisprudential observations in its judgement.Continue Reading Tax reassessment proceedings: Supreme Court puts TOLA controversy to rest

Delhi High Court rules on taxability of a PE’s profits despite global loss

In a landmark ruling, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court (“Delhi HC”) has held that profits generated by a Permanent Establishment (PE) in India shall be liable to tax in India, even if the parent enterprise has incurred losses on a consolidated basis. This decision overturns the previous judicial position set forth in the Nokia Solutions judgment and carries significant implications for global corporations operating in multiple jurisdictions.Continue Reading Delhi High Court rules on taxability of a PE’s profits despite global loss

The India–Mauritius Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (“DTAA”), entered into in 1983, has since been the subject matter of contentious litigations. The well-drafted and reasoned ruling of the Delhi High Court (“Delhi HC”), which explains the availability of benefits to a Mauritius-based investor, the significance of the tax residency certificate (“TRC”), the limitation of benefits (“LoB”) clause, and the grandfathering provision in the treaty, has provided much-anticipated relief and certainty to the taxpayers.Continue Reading Delhi High Court grants tax-treaty benefits to Tiger Global’s Flipkart exit

First judgment on GAAR holds bonus-stripping to be an impermissible tax-avoidance arrangement

The provisions of General Anti-Avoidance Rules (“GAAR”) were implemented into Income Tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”), for the first time with effect from the financial year 2017–18. The GAAR provisions provide the Indian Revenue Authorities (“IRA”) with wide powers, including even recharacterising a transaction, ignoring a part or the whole of a series of transactions, disallowing expenses incurred, etc., if the main purpose of the transaction was to obtain tax benefits. Considering the aggressive nature in which the IRA generally scrutinises the GAAR cases, the industry is always apprehensive that these GAAR provisions could be invoked in a wide-spread manner. However, much to the relief of the taxpayers, the IRA have rarely invoked these provisions.Continue Reading First judgment on GAAR holds bonus-stripping to be an impermissible tax-avoidance arrangement

Delhi HC delivers an important pronouncement on permanent establishment

In a significant decision delivered recently, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi (“Hon’ble HC”) has shot down the case of the Income Tax Department (“ITD”) wherein the ITD had alleged three kinds of permanent establishments (“PE”). In Progress Rail Locomotive Inc.[1] (“Assessee”), the ITD intended to target the Assessee by putting it in all three conceivable PE silos i.e., Fixed Place PE, Service PE and dependent agent PE (“DAPE”) and used it as reasons to reopen the case. The Hon’ble HC rejected the contentions of the ITD by holding them to be prima facie unsustainable.Continue Reading Delhi HC delivers an important pronouncement on permanent establishment