Tax Law

Treading a fine line: Extension is ultra-vires but valid?

Summary: This blog examines the ongoing judicial debate surrounding extensions of GST limitation periods in the wake of the pandemic and subsequent systemic challenges. It outlines the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court, which set aside Notification No. 56/2023 issued under Section 168A of the CGST Act, extending timelines for recovery orders for FY 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The blog notes how this position differs from those adopted by the Hon’ble Guwahati, Telangana, and Bihar High Courts on the same matter, addresses the possible need for intervention by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and outlines considerations for taxpayers.Continue Reading Treading a fine line: Extension is ultra-vires but valid?

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

Introduction

The intricacies of tax law often unfold through nuanced interpretations and amendments aimed at addressing loopholes. One such facet is the taxation of capital contributions by partners in partnership firms (including limited liability partnerships), as delineated under section 45(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“IT Act”). This provision deals with taxing transactions

Taxpayer’s Choice for Valuation of Shares at Premium Upheld

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in the case of M/s. Rameshwaram Strong Glass (P) Ltd. v The Income Tax Officer[1] has upheld the right of the company issuing shares to choose the valuation methodology under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) read with the rules framed thereunder (Tax Law) for the purposes of determining the ‘fair market value’ (FMV) of such shares at premium.
Continue Reading Taxpayer’s Choice for Valuation of Shares at Premium Upheld

The Telangana and Andhra Pradesh High Court (High Court) in the case of Leo Edibles and Fats Limited v. TRO, Writ Petition No 8560 of 2018, has allowed the liquidation of assets of a company under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), despite the claim of the tax authorities that they have a charge over it, by virtue of having initiated attachment proceedings under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act). The High Court, while dealing with the interplay between the IT Act and the IBC, held that the income tax authorities are not at par with ‘secured creditors’ under the IBC.

The petitioner in the instant case had purchased certain property of a company undergoing liquidation under the IBC in an e-auction. The registrar refused to register the transfer in favour of the petitioner due to the attachment notice issued by the tax authorities. Accordingly, the petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the refusal of the registrar to register the sale deed – and sought issuance of direction to the income tax department to withdraw the said attachment.Continue Reading Decoded: The Interplay Between Tax Law and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code