Daily digest for Gupta Chandan & Associates, on February 23, 2026

Income Tax Forms as applicable from 1st April 2026. Old forms under income tax Act 1961 added for better search. Search by old form number, new form number, section, rule,…

Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Income Tax Forms under Income Tax Act 2025 By Sangeeta Kumari on February 22, 2026 Income Tax Forms as applicable from 1st April 2026. Old forms under income tax Act 1961 added for better search. Search by old form number, new form number, section, rule, key words. Comment Gupta Chandan & Associates © 2026. Unsubscribe or manage your email subscriptions. Get the Jetpack app Subscribe, bookmark, and get real-time notifications – all from one app! Automattic, Inc. 60 29th St. #343, San Francisco, CA 94110

Daily digest for Gupta Chandan & Associates, on September 29, 2025

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing! Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Hello world! By admin on September 19, 2025 Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start writing! Comment

Gupta Chandan & Associates © 2025. Unsubscribe or manage your email subscriptions. Get the Jetpack app Subscribe, bookmark, and get real‑time notifications - all from one app! Automattic, Inc. 60 29th St. #343, San Francisco, CA 94110

Daily digest for Gupta Chandan & Associates, on January 17, 2025

​    [[{"value":"GSTN Update dated January 7th, … Continue reading "GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT" The post GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notifi… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"GSTN Update dated January 7th, … Continue reading "GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT" The post GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" GSTN Update dated January 7th, 2025 The GSTN has issued an advisory to inform that a functionality has been made available on the GST portal for taxpayers to file an application for rectification of order confirming demand due to the wrong availment of input tax credit, arising from the contravention of the provisions of Section 16(4) as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT. Such ITC has now become eligible under the provisions of Section 16(5) and Section 16(6) and taxpayers can file a rectification application for orders issued under Section 73 and Section 74 of the CGST Act. To file an application for rectification of such orders, the taxpayer is required to navigate to Services > User Services > My Applications, select 'Application for rectification of order' in the Application Type field, and click on the 'NEW APPLICATION' button A proforma in 'Annexure A' for containing the details of demand order has been provided on GST portal for download in word format. This proforma is required to be uploaded after entering the details of the demand order for which the rectification application needs to be filed. Click Here To Read The Full Update The post GSTN Enables Filing of "Application for Rectification" as per Notification No. 22/2024-CT appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"CA Keshav Gupta & Keshav … Continue reading "[Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis" The post [Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"v… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"CA Keshav Gupta & Keshav … Continue reading "[Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis" The post [Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" CA Keshav Gupta & Keshav Agarwal – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 159 (Article) 1. Introduction In the context of Goods and Services Tax (GST), Show Cause Notices (SCNs) are an important tool used by tax authorities to ensure compliance with tax laws. These notices are issued when the authorities suspect a taxpayer has violated the provisions of GST, such as underreporting tax liabilities or claiming incorrect input tax credits (ITC). A common question that arises is whether SCNs should be clubbed (combined) or de-clubbed (separated). What are SCNs? A Show Cause Notice is a written notice issued by the GST authorities to a taxpayer, asking them to explain why a particular action or inaction should not result in penalties or legal repercussions. It is an essential part of the adjudication process under GST, ensuring that taxpayers have the opportunity to present their case before any punitive measures are taken. 2. Clubbing of SCNs 2.1 Definition Clubbing refers to the practice of merging multiple SCNs into one. This is typically done when the issues raised in the notices are interrelated or concern the same tax period, set of facts, or circumstances. For example, if a taxpayer is facing several notices related to the same transaction or a similar issue, the authorities may decide to club them together. 2.2 Advantages of Clubbing SCNs Efficiency in Legal Proceedings: Combining multiple SCNs into one notice reduces the number of hearings and eliminates repetitive arguments. The issues are addressed in one go, which simplifies the process. Lower Legal Costs: Since fewer hearings are required, both the taxpayer and the authorities save on legal and administrative expenses. Consistency in Rulings: Clubbing ensures that similar issues are treated uniformly, reducing the chances of receiving conflicting decisions from different officers. 3. De-clubbing of SCNs 3.1 Definition De-clubbing refers to the separation of matters arising out of common proceedings into multiple notices. This is typically done when the issues raised are distinct, involve different legal grounds, or concern different periods or entities. For example, if a taxpayer is facing issues related to different tax periods or different kinds of violations, de-clubbing helps separate these cases for clearer adjudication. 3.2 Advantages of De-clubbing SCNs Focused Attention: When issues are separated, each one can be examined in detail. This ensures that all facts and legal arguments are fully considered, and each issue is addressed properly. Clearer Legal Process: De-clubbing avoids confusion when the issues or parties involved are unrelated. It ensures that each case is adjudicated independently, making the process clearer and more precise. Compliance with Legal Requirements: In some cases, the law requires that certain issues be handled separately. De-clubbing ensures that the proceedings follow these legal guidelines. Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Clubbing vs. De-Clubbing of SCNs | Critical Analysis appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: L and T … Continue reading "Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based on Work Done for Barrage Construction in Telangana and Maharashtra | HC" The post Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based o… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based on Work Done for Barrage Construction in Telangana and Maharashtra | HC By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: L and T … Continue reading "Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based on Work Done for Barrage Construction in Telangana and Maharashtra | HC" The post Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based on Work Done for Barrage Construction in Telangana and Maharashtra | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: L and T PES JV v. Assistant Commissioner of State Tax - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 181 (Telangana) Judiciary and Counsel Details P. Sam Koshy & Laxmi Narayana Ali Shetty, JJ. Karthik Ramana Puttamreddy, Adv. for the Petitioner. Facts of the Case The petitioner JV received a contract from State of Telangana for construction of a barrage in Telangana. The execution of contract was spread between Telangana and Maharashtra. The petitioner raised separate bills for works executed in both States with corresponding GSTINs. However, the TDS deducted by department on total value of bills was remitted only to Telangana. Therefore, the petitioner approached the department for refund of excess TDS but the same was rejected. It filed writ petition and contended that the entire TDS amount was deposited with the State of Telangana and no reason to deny refund. High Court Held The Honorable High Court noted that the place of supply of service in both States can be assessed/determined only on the basis of actual works executed in each State and also as per terms of agreement as specified in Explanation to section 12(3) of IGST Act. Since, the place of supply is determined depending on proportion of work executed and it falls under category of intra-State supply under Section 8 of IGST Act with respect to proportion of works executed in respective States by contractors registered in respective States, the tax liability shall be discharged individually in each State to extent of proportion of works executed therein. Therefore, it was held that petitioner should approach adjudicating authority with relevant material and on such submission, adjudicating authority should consider same and pass appropriate orders for refund of TDS amount in event of petitioner furnishing appropriate, cogent documents in proof of discharge of liability in State of Maharashtra. The post Tax Liability to Be Discharged in Each State Based on Work Done for Barrage Construction in Telangana and Maharashtra | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Limton Metals Ltd. … Continue reading "Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set Aside as It Did Not Provide Any Reasons for Retrospective Cancellation | HC" The post Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set … Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set Aside as It Did Not Provide Any Reasons for Retrospective Cancellation | HC By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Limton Metals Ltd. … Continue reading "Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set Aside as It Did Not Provide Any Reasons for Retrospective Cancellation | HC" The post Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set Aside as It Did Not Provide Any Reasons for Retrospective Cancellation | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: Limton Metals Ltd. v. Superintendant - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 182 (Calcutta) Judiciary and Counsel Details T. S. Sivagnanam, CJ. & Hiranmay Bhattacharyya, J. Ms Rita Mukherjee, Abhijat Das & Ms Aratrika Roy for the Appellant. Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee & Abhradip Maity for the Respondent. Facts of the Case The appellant received a show cause notice and submitted a reply but the department passed an order cancelling the registration of the appellant. It filed writ petition and contended that the order was devoid of reasons and unsustainable in law. The learned Single Bench disposed of the writ petition with certain observations and the appellant filed appeal against the order. High Court Held The Honorable High Court noted that the order was passed in Form GST REG-19, however the statutory format did not give any reasons as to why the appellant's registration had to be cancelled that too with retrospective effect. The Court also noted that the appellant's submission was that it had not received any enclosures along with Form GST REG-19. Since, the appellant had submitted a reply to the show cause notice, it was for the authority to consider the reply and to record reasons in writing either accepting the reply or rejecting the contentions of the reply to the show cause notice. Therefore, the Court held that the impugned order cancelling the GST registration was to be set aside and matter was to be remanded back to the authority. List of Cases Reviewed WPA 11277 of 2024 25/06/2024 (Para 12) reversed. The post Order Cancelling GST Registration to Be Set Aside as It Did Not Provide Any Reasons for Retrospective Cancellation | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Prateek Mitruka – [2025] 170 … Continue reading "[Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts" The post [Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Prateek Mitruka – [2025] 170 … Continue reading "[Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts" The post [Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Prateek Mitruka – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 279 (Article) 1. Introduction The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) issued Circular No. 241/35/2024 on December 31, 2024, clarifying the availability of Input Tax Credit (ITC) under Section 16(2)(b) of the CGST Act, 2017. This circular stems from concerns raised by the automobile sector about ITC eligibility in cases where goods are delivered under Ex-Works (EXW) contracts. Let's delve into the circular's details, its implications for taxpayers, and the broader GST compliance landscape. 2. Key Highlights of Circular No. 241/35/2024 2.1 Background of the Circular The automobile sector raised queries about ITC eligibility under EXW contracts. Here, Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) transfer goods to dealers at their own factory gate. The OEMs often arrange transportation and insurance on behalf of the dealer. Despite this, disputes arose over the ITC claim timing: OEMs' Viewpoint: ITC should be claimable when goods are handed over to transporters at the factory gate. Tax Authorities' Viewpoint: ITC should only be claimable when goods are physically received at the dealer's business premises. This conflict led to the issuance of the circular to ensure uniformity in interpreting Section 16(2)(b). Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Understanding Input Tax Credit Under Ex-Works Contracts appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"GSTN Update dated January 10th, … Continue reading "Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Correct HSN from Given Dropdown in Table 12 of GSTR-1 | GSTN Update" The post Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Cor… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Correct HSN from Given Dropdown in Table 12 of GSTR-1 | GSTN Update By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"GSTN Update dated January 10th, … Continue reading "Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Correct HSN from Given Dropdown in Table 12 of GSTR-1 | GSTN Update" The post Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Correct HSN from Given Dropdown in Table 12 of GSTR-1 | GSTN Update appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" GSTN Update dated January 10th, 2025 The GSTN has issued an advisory to inform that now Phase-III regarding Table 12 of Form GSTR-1 & Form GSTR-1A is being implemented, from return period January 2025. In this phase manual entry of HSN has been replaced by choosing correct HSN from given Drop down and the corresponding description will auto-populate in the 'Description as per HSN Code' field from the HSN Master. Additionally, these new validations will cross-check the reported values for B2B and B2C supplies with corresponding data in other tables of Form GSTR-1. In cases of amendments, only the differential values will be validated. These validations will initially be in warning mode, enabling taxpayers to file returns despite any discrepancies. In case B2B supplies are reported in other tables of GSTR-1, B2B tab of Table-12 cannot be left blank. Click Here To Read The Full Update The post Manual Entry of HSN to Be Replaced by Choosing Correct HSN from Given Dropdown in Table 12 of GSTR-1 | GSTN Update appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"CA Keshav Gupta & Sahil … Continue reading "[Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path to Litigation" The post [Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path to Litigation By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"CA Keshav Gupta & Sahil … Continue reading "[Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path to Litigation" The post [Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path to Litigation appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" CA Keshav Gupta & Sahil Dewan – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 280 (Article) 1. Introduction The Goods and Services Tax (GST) system was designed to streamline the taxation process by providing businesses with the ability to offset tax paid on inputs through the mechanism of Input Tax Credit (ITC). This mechanism, while invaluable, has also become a potential minefield. One of the most common and concerning errors businesses face is the improper availment or utilization of ITC under the wrong tax head. This seemingly minor issue can escalate into significant financial and legal challenges, including interest charges, penalties, and extended litigation. This article explores why such errors occur, the risks they pose, and how businesses can avoid falling into this trap. The GST regime divides taxes into three distinct heads: Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST), State Goods and Services Tax (SGST), and Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST). CGST and SGST are applicable to intra-state supplies, while IGST is applied to inter-state transactions and imports. Under the law, businesses must ensure that ITC is claimed under the correct head of tax. For example, ITC on IGST must first be used to offset IGST liabilities, and any excess can then be used for CGST and SGST, but not the other way around. Similarly, CGST and SGST ITC should only be utilized for their respective liabilities. The incorrect allocation of ITC between these heads can result in significant complications, both from a tax and legal perspective. 2. Root Causes of ITC Misallocation Despite the clear guidelines and legal framework around ITC, several factors contribute to the misallocation of credits: Complex Transactions and Multi-State Operations: For businesses that operate across multiple states or have a combination of intra-state and inter-state supplies, correctly attributing ITC can become a challenging task. Mistakes can easily occur when businesses fail to differentiate between CGST, SGST, and IGST liabilities in complex transactions. Accounting Software and Manual Errors: A significant number of errors arise due to misconfigurations in accounting systems or manual data entry mistakes. Businesses may inadvertently apply credits to the wrong head because of software misalignment or human oversight during GST return filing. Lack of Awareness and Expertise: Smaller businesses or newly registered entities often struggle with the nuances of GST compliance. Limited understanding of how ITC should be properly availed and utilized can lead to mistakes, especially when businesses face the pressure of meeting deadlines for GST filings. Frequent Amendments to GST Laws: The ever-evolving nature of GST law, with frequent amendments, updates, and clarifications, often creates confusion. Even experienced tax professionals may struggle to keep up with changes, leading to inadvertent misallocations in ITC claims. 3. ITC taken as Intra State Supply for Inter State Supply or Vice Versa In this scenario, ITC was taken as an Intra state supply for Interstate supply or vice-versa. Where a tax payer who claims ITC in wrong head i.e. CGST and SGST instead of IGST and IGST instead of CGST and SGST. Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Availment and Utilisation of ITC Under Incorrect Tax Heads | A Path to Litigation appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Instruction No. 01/2025-GST dated January … Continue reading "Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction" The post Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Instruction No. 01/2025-GST dated January … Continue reading "Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction" The post Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Instruction No. 01/2025-GST dated January 13th, 2025 The CBIC has issued instruction to amend the earlier guidelines regarding arrest and bail under GST provided under Instruction 02/2022-23 GST (Investigation) dated 17.8.2022. Now, it is provided that grounds of arrest must be explained to the arrested person and also furnished to him in writing. Also, the acknowledgement of the same should be taken from the arrested person at the time of service of the Arrest Memo. Click Here To Read The Full Instruction The post Ground of Arrest Must Be Explained to Arrested Person Under GST | Instruction appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 02/2025 – Central … Continue reading "Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Notification" The post Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Not… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Notification By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 02/2025 – Central … Continue reading "Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Notification" The post Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Notification appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Notification No. 02/2025 – Central Tax dated January 10th, 2025 The CBIC has issued notification for extension of time limit for furnishing the return in FORM GSTR-3B for the taxpayers filing return monthly till 22nd January. The time limit of return filing of GSTR-3B under QRMP scheme for the quarter of October, 2024 to December, 2024 is also extended by 2 days. Click Here To Read The Full Notification The post Time Limit for Furnishing the Return in Form GSTR-3B Extended by CBIC | Notification appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 01/2025 – Central … Continue reading "CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days" The post CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days appeared f… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 01/2025 – Central … Continue reading "CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days" The post CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Notification No. 01/2025 – Central Tax dated January 10th, 2025 The CBIC has issued notification to extend the due date of filing monthly GSTR-1 for the tax period December, 2024 till 13th January, 2025 and quarterly GSTR-1 for the tax period October to December, 2024, till 15th January, 2025. Click Here To Read The Full Notification The post CBIC Extends Due Date of GSTR-1 for the Tax Period December 2024 by 2 Days appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] GST & Customs Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 6/2025, dated 06-01-2025 … Continue reading "'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) TCS | CBDT" The post 'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) … Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader 'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) TCS | CBDT By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Notification No. 6/2025, dated 06-01-2025 … Continue reading "'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) TCS | CBDT" The post 'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) TCS | CBDT appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Notification No. 6/2025, dated 06-01-2025 Section 206C(1H) prescribes the provision of tax collection by a seller who receives any amount as consideration for the sale of any goods if the aggregate value of such sale consideration received in any previous year exceeds Rs. 50 lakh. The explanation to section 206C(1H) defines the meaning of buyer as a person who purchases any goods, but does not include: a) the Central Government, a State Government, an embassy, a High Commission, legation, commission, consulate and the trade representation of a foreign State; or b) a local authority as defined in the Explanation to clause (20) of section 10; or c) a person importing goods into India or any other person as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify for this purpose, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein In this regard, the Central Government, vide Notification No. 6/2025, specified that a Unit of the International Financial Services Centre shall not be considered as buyer for the purposes of the said sub-section in respect of the purchase of goods from a seller, subject to the following conditions, namely: a) The buyer shall: i) Furnish a statement-cum-declaration in Form No. 1A to the seller giving details of previous years relevant to the ten consecutive assessment years for which the buyer opts for claiming deduction under sub-sections (1A) and (2) of section 80LA; and ii) such statement-cum-declaration so furnished shall be verified in the manner specified in the said Form for each previous year relevant to the ten consecutive assessment years for which the buyer opts for claiming deduction under sub-sections (1A) and (2) of section 80LA; b) the seller shall: i) Not collect tax on payment received from the buyer after the date of receipt of copy of statement-cum-declaration from the buyer; and ii) Furnish the particulars of all the payments received from the buyer on which tax has not been collected in section 206C(3) read with rule 31AA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. This relaxation shall be available to the buyer only during the said previous years relevant to the ten consecutive assessment years as declared by the buyer in the said Form for which deduction under section 80LA of the said Act is being opted, and the seller shall be liable to collect tax on payments received for any other year. This notification is effective from 1st day of January, 2025. Click Here To Read The Full Notification The post 'Unit' of IFSC Shall Not Be Considered as a Buyer for Sec. 206C(1H) TCS | CBDT appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"1. Overview of Tax Exemptions … Continue reading "[Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Audit Report Form of Trusts (10B/10BB)" The post [Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Au… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Audit Report Form of Trusts (10B/10BB) By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"1. Overview of Tax Exemptions … Continue reading "[Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Audit Report Form of Trusts (10B/10BB)" The post [Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Audit Report Form of Trusts (10B/10BB) appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" 1. Overview of Tax Exemptions for Charitable Institutions Under the Income-tax Act, 1961, tax exemptions are available to Charitable Institutions registered under sections 10(23C) and 12AB, subject to compliance with the provisions of sections 11 and 12. To avail these exemptions, the Institutions must adhere to specific conditions, including utilizing at least 85% of their total receipts for charitable purposes, meeting prescribed reporting requirements, and maintaining proper records in accordance with the law. 2. Role and Significance of Forms 10B and 10BB In line with these provisions, Charitable Institutions are required to submit audit reports in a prescribed format to ensure compliance with the conditions outlined in sections 11 and 12. Just as Form 3CD serves as the tax audit report for assessees other than Charitable Institutions, Forms 10B and 10BB are specifically designed to audit and verify the financial statements of Charitable Institutions availing exemptions under sections 10(23C) and 12AB. These audit report forms help maintain transparency and accountability by certifying that the Charitable Institutions meet the required conditions for tax exemptions through comprehensive reporting requirements. This topic gains heightened relevance due to the substantial and transformative changes introduced in Forms 10B and 10BB, brought into effect through Notification No. 7/2023, issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on February 21, 2023. 3. Key Amendments to Forms 10B and 10BB These revised audit reports demand more comprehensive disclosures and reporting, leading to greater transparency and compliance. The new forms have done away with the distinction of separate forms based on the section under which a trust is registered under the Income Tax Act, 1961. Instead, a new classification can be made by "small trusts" and "big trusts" based on a threshold limit of Rs. 5 crore, irrespective of whether the trust is registered under Section 10(23C) or 12AB. The applicability of Forms 10B and 10BB prior to and after amendments can be better understood by this below: Aspect Before Amendments After Amendments Form 10B 1. Applicable to charitable and religious trusts/institutions registered under Section 12A/12AB. 2. Audit report restricted to 5 pages with 16 clauses. Applicable to Charitable Institutions if any of the following conditions are met: Gross receipts (before applying Sections 11 and 12) exceeds Rs. 5 crores. Received foreign contributions during the financial year. Applied any part of its income outside India during the financial year. Audit report of more than 17-18 pages with 49 clauses. Form 10BB Applicable to charitable and religious trusts/institutions registered under Section 10(23C). Audit report restricted to 6 pages with 19 clauses. Applicable to charitable trusts, religious trusts, educational institutions, and hospitals not meeting Form 10B criteria i.e., where the gross receipts are up to Rs. 5 crores. Audit report of more than 10-12 pages with 32 clauses. The new audit report forms are so comprehensive that they can be considered a consolidation of the following: All amendments in Income Tax Act related to Charitable Institutions Earlier 10B and 10BB ITR- 7 Compilation of Personal Information details of Trust and Trustee Assessment Orders of AO/CIT/ITAT/HC Landmark Judgements of Supreme Court Registration Forms i.e., 10A/ 10AB Notification for Books of accounts Let us now shift our focus to the core objective of this article: examining the practical challenges faced during the filing of Forms 10B and 10BB and exploring their potential solutions. This article focuses on key practical challenges deemed significant by the author. However, it is important to note that there are several other challenges not covered in this discussion. Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Practical Difficulties and Probable Solutions of New Audit Report Form of Trusts (10B/10BB) appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Mukesh Rasiklal Shah … Continue reading "Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Even if Fully Recovered by Govt in Subsequent Years | ITAT" The post Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Eve… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Even if Fully Recovered by Govt in Subsequent Years | ITAT By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Mukesh Rasiklal Shah … Continue reading "Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Even if Fully Recovered by Govt in Subsequent Years | ITAT" The post Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Even if Fully Recovered by Govt in Subsequent Years | ITAT appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: Mukesh Rasiklal Shah vs. ACIT - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 122 (Ahmedabad-Trib.) Judiciary and Counsel Details Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-President & T.R. Senthil Kumar, Judicial Member Mukesh R. Shah, Party in person for the Appellant. Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR for the Respondent. Facts of the Case Assessee, a chartered accountant, obtained refunds from the income tax department by producing forged challans. After the search and seizure operation, the Assessing Officer (AO) added such forged amount to the respective assessment years in which the assessee obtained fraudulent refunds contending that the assessee had defrauded the Govt. of India to the extent of the said amount by entering into illegal activity of encashment of refunds based on fraudulent challans. The assessee contended that the government of India had fully recovered the alleged misappropriation of income tax refunds or money receipts. Hence, it did not constitute income chargeable to tax. On appeal, CIT(A) confirmed the additions made by AO and the matter reached before the Ahmedabad Tribunal. ITAT Held The Tribunal held that the case presented a peculiar situation where the income, accrued fraudulently by the assessee, was parked in the accounts of his family's HUF and further leveraged for economic benefits, such as investments and financial gains. The assessee had accepted engaging in the fraudulent activity, which resulted in tangible control and dominion over the funds. This conduct, coupled with the economic benefits derived from the tainted money, reinforces the principle that such income must be attributed to the assessee for tax purposes. While the taxability of the economic benefits derived from such fraudulent income is beyond the current scope, the fact that the assessee leveraged these funds for personal gains adds weight to the case for taxing the income in the year of accrual. This aligns with the established principle that income, once accrued or received, irrespective of its legality, must be taxed under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It is an undisputable fact that the assessee has admitted to fraudulently earning income and parking the same in the accounts operated by him. The deliberate act of parking funds in the accounts he operates does not absolve the assessee of the taxability of such income. The assessee had dominion over the funds and utilized them for economic gains, including investments. This clearly establishes that the income accrued to the assessee, making it taxable in his hands. The principle that tainted or illegal income is taxable has been well established in law. The illegality of the source does not absolve the recipient from tax liability. Further, Section 2(24) is an inclusive definition and does not differentiate between the legality or illegality of earning income. The income tax department does not condone the illegal activity of claiming fraudulent income from the government's exchequer by subjecting the amount to tax as per the statute. The taxation of the illegal amounts earned as per the rates provided in the income-tax statute cannot be deemed to have given the assessee the right to usurp or enjoy the remaining illegal amounts. Taxability arises at the point of accrual or receipt. Even if the income is later restituted or recovered, its taxability remains unaffected for the year of accrual. Subsequent adjustments do not negate the taxability for the original period, for the matter, generation, recovery and restitution are separate transactions. Thus, restitution or recovery is treated independently for taxation purposes. Taxability remains intact for the year of accrual, and recovery does not create a retroactive exemption. Therefore, the additions made by AO were to be confirmed. List of Cases Reviewed CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) CIT v. Piara Singh [1980] 124 ITR 40 (SC) Chandrika Prasad Ram Swarup v. CIT [1939] 7 ITR 269 (All.) (para 14) CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC) CIT v. S.C. Kothari [1971] 82 ITR 794 (SC) (para 15) A. Raman & Co. v. CIT [(1968) AIR 49 (SC) (para 16) followed. List of Cases Referred to Dr. T.A. Quereshi v. CIT [2006] 157 Taxman 514/287 ITR 547 (SC) (para 7) CIT v. Sitaldas Tirathdas [1961] 41 ITR 367 (SC) (para 14) CIT v. Piara Singh [1980] 3 Taxman 67/124 ITR 40 (SC) (para 14) Chandrika Prasad Ram Swarup v. CIT [1939] 7 ITR 269 (Allahabad) (para 14) CIT v. Shoorji Vallabhdas & Co. [1962] 46 ITR 144 (SC) (para 15) CIT v. S.C. Kothari [1971] 82 ITR 794 (SC) (para 15) The post Fraudulent Income from Forged Challans is Taxable Even if Fully Recovered by Govt in Subsequent Years | ITAT appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Ramkishan Choudhary & Parv Jain … Continue reading "[Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering Alterations in Safeguards That Tilt the Balance Against Assessees" The post [Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering Alterations in Safeguards That Tilt the Balance Against Assessees By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Ramkishan Choudhary & Parv Jain … Continue reading "[Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering Alterations in Safeguards That Tilt the Balance Against Assessees" The post [Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering Alterations in Safeguards That Tilt the Balance Against Assessees appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Ramkishan Choudhary & Parv Jain – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 154 (Article) Section 268A of the Income tax Act ("the Act") was inserted via the Finance Bill, 2008 with the main objective of reducing litigation and to fix the monetary limits on filling appeal or a SLP. This year, Central Board of Direct Tax 'CBDT' made several alterations in the Section 268A of the Act via Circular No. 5 of 2024 and Circular No. 9 of 2024 wherein various new exceptions to the monetary limits as prescribed in the section were introduced where the decision to file an appeal would be taken on merits without regard to the tax effect and the monetary limits. In recent times, while there has been a commendable increase in debates on any new advancement within the Indian Tax Domain, it is dismaying how there is very limited discussion around certain key developments, including recent circulars on the Section 268A of the Act. The objective for which the provision was brought has lost its charm and becoming significantly diluted and deviated. This article delves into the background of Section 268A, examining how this provision has evolved over the years. It also seeks to uncover the legislative intent behind this section and analyze the ways in which the Revenue has diverged from its core objective Background The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dy. CIT v. Berger Paints India Ltd. [2022] 142 taxmann.com 279 (Kolkata – Trib.) laid down various important principles emphasizing fairness and consistency in reducing litigation and ensuring that the assessee is treated equitably. Section 268A of the Act was introduced with the objective to align with these principles laid down in the Burger Paints Case. In the Circular No.1 of 2009, the revenue provided the explanatory notes to the provisions of the Finance Act, 2008 which outlines the primary rationale behind the introduction of the Section 268A. Two key objectives can be inferred from the explanatory notes: To reduce litigation in small cases. To protect revenue's right to file an appeal and when not to file an appeal to bring some consistency in the litigation approach. Following the insertion of the Section 268A of the Act in 2008, the board has issued several circulars to establish the monetary limits for filling an appeal and to introduce new exceptions to these monetary limits. In a growing economy, it is justifiable to revise the monetary limits to address the increasing tax effect of the assessee. This is also reflected by the fact that the Hon'ble Supreme Court disposed of 573 direct tax cases after the monetary limits to file appeal were revised in the Union Budget 2024-25. However, the issue arose when the Board started to incorporate exceptions to the section. While the earlier exceptions were broad and logical, recent circulars have brought in exceptions that are highly specific and narrowly focused. This change raises an important question: What is the actual objective of Section 268A of the Act? Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] A Revamped Section 268A | Deciphering Alterations in Safeguards That Tilt the Balance Against Assessees appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Imran Ibrahim Badshah … Continue reading "AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/s 69A if Assessee Accounted for It Under Presumptive Taxation | ITAT" The post AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/s 69A if Assessee Accounted for It Under Presumptive Taxation | ITAT By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Imran Ibrahim Badshah … Continue reading "AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/s 69A if Assessee Accounted for It Under Presumptive Taxation | ITAT" The post AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/s 69A if Assessee Accounted for It Under Presumptive Taxation | ITAT appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: Imran Ibrahim Badshah vs. ITO - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 166 (Mumbai-Trib.) Judiciary and Counsel Details Narender Kumar Choudhry, Judicial Member Bharat Kumar, Ld. A.R. for the Appellant. V.K. Chaturvedi, Ld. Sr. D.R. for the Respondent. Facts of the Case The assessee was engaged in the business of imitation jewellery and declared the gross profit at 8% of gross receipt as his income under section 44AD. On enquiry, the Assessing Officer (AO) revealed that the assessee had furnished the computation of income for receipt under section 44AD; however, they could not furnish a certain amount, which remained unexplained. The AO treated such an amount as unexplained and added it under section 69A. On appeal, the CIT(A) affirmed the addition made by the AO. Aggrieved by the order, an appeal was filed to the Mumbai Tribunal. AAR Held The Tribunal held that though it was a fact that the total deposits of 1.25 crores (approximately) were made in the bank account maintained with the Co-operative Bank Ltd. The assessee has shown the amount of 1.08 crores (approximately) as a gross receipt and claimed that the differential amount was from the savings out of the profits earned from the earlier years and the household savings of the family, which was deposited in the bank during the demonetisation period. The AO and the CIT(A), considering that the assessee furnished no details, respectively, made and affirmed the addition under section 69A. Instant Court has thoughtfully considered the rival claims of the parties and the determination made by the authorities below. Admittedly, the assessee has not done any other business except the imitation jewellery. Even otherwise, no material was available on record by which it can be construed that the assessee has earned any other income other than from the admitted business. Thus, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances in totality, it would be appropriate, as both the parties have also agreed in the open court, to treat such an amount as business receipts. Therefore, the same can be subjected to profit at 8 percent of the said amount, which can be added to the assessee's income. Hence, the AO was directed to apply the profit at the rate of 8% and add the same to the assessee's income. Accordingly, the additions under section 69A were deleted. The post AO Can't Treat Unexplained Cash as Income u/s 69A if Assessee Accounted for It Under Presumptive Taxation | ITAT appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"D.C. Agrawal – [2025] 170 … Continue reading "[Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3)" The post [Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3) appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" … Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3) By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"D.C. Agrawal – [2025] 170 … Continue reading "[Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3)" The post [Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3) appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" D.C. Agrawal – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 235 (Article) 1. Introduction In the case of Shelf Drilling Ron Tappmeyer Ltd. v. ACIT (IT)[2023] 153 taxmann.com 162 (Bombay), the petitioner, a Cayman Islands-incorporated company headquartered in Dubai and engaged in shallow water drilling for the oil and gas industry, filed its income tax return in India for AY 2014-15, declaring a loss of Rs. 120.18 crores under regular provisions instead of presumptive taxation under Section 44BB(3). The petitioner operated a rig, J.T. Angel, acquired through an Asset Purchase Agreement, which provided drilling services to ONGC under sub-contracts via Shelf Drilling Offshore Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. (SDOSIPL). During scrutiny, the Assessing Officer (AO) invoked Section 145 to reject the petitioner's books of account and computed income under Section 44BB(1) at 10% of gross receipts. The Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) upheld the AO's approach, leading to a final assessment under Sections 143(3) and 144C(13). On appeal, the ITAT held that the rejection of books was improper, remanding the matter for fresh adjudication. Subsequently, the AO issued a draft assessment order on September 28, 2021. The assessee not only filed the objections against the draft order but also challenged that AO could not have passed final assessment order as being time-barred, because the statutory time limit u/s 153 expired on September 30, 2021 and Revenue will not get any benefit of Section 144C(13). Hon'ble High Court considered the arguments of the parties and decided the case in favour of the assessee holding that final assessment order could not be passed after 30-09-2021. In this article, issues before the Court, arguments of the parties, decision of the Court and analysis of this decision will be briefly described. 2. Issues raised before the Court Following issues were considered by Hon'ble Bombay High Court- Applicability of Time Limits for Assessment: Whether the time limit prescribed under Section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for completion of an assessment (12 months from the end of the financial year in which the ITAT order was received) would override the provisions under Section 144C, which provides its own timelines for dispute resolution by the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP) and final assessment order issuance. Interaction Between Sections 144C and 153: Whether the specific timelines in Section 144C for the DRP's directions and subsequent actions by the Assessing Officer are self-contained and override the general time limit prescribed under Section 153(3), particularly in cases of remand from the ITAT. Barred Limitation and Consequences: Whether the final assessment order passed after the expiry of the 12-month limitation under Section 153(3), despite compliance with Section 144C timelines, is invalid and time-barred, requiring the return of income filed by the petitioner to be accepted. Validity of Draft Assessment Order: Whether the draft assessment order passed on 28-09-2021 within the extended limitation period could sustain proceedings, despite no final assessment order being issued by the last date of the extended period (30-09-2021). 3. The facts relating to these four issues were as under Applicability of Time Limits for Assessment The petitioner, a company based in the Cayman Islands, filed its return of income for the assessment year (AY) 2014–15, declaring a loss of Rs. 120.18 crores. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) had remanded the case back to the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication on 4 October 2019, directing the AO to consider the books of accounts and documentary evidence. Under Section 153(3), the time limit for completing the assessment after an ITAT remand was 12 months from the end of the financial year in which the ITAT order was received. This deadline was further extended to 30 September 2021 under a COVID-19-related notification. The AO passed a draft assessment order on 28 September 2021, but no final assessment order was issued before the expiry of the time limit on 30 September 2021. Interaction Between Sections 144C and 153 Section 144C provides a self-contained mechanism for handling objections to draft assessment orders via the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP). It includes specific time limits for various stages of the process, such as nine months for the DRP to issue directions and one month for the AO to pass a final assessment order. Section 153(3), however, prescribes a general time limit of 12 months for completing assessments following an ITAT remand. The petitioner argued that the specific timelines in Section 144C do not override the overarching time limit in Section 153(3), and the assessment was barred by limitation. The Revenue contended that Section 144C, being a later and special provision, operated independently of Section 153(3) and allowed sufficient time for the DRP and AO to complete the process. Barred Limitation and Consequences The ITAT remanded the matter on 4 October 2019, triggering the time limit under Section 153(3). The extended deadline of 30 September 2021 was calculated based on relaxations provided by TOLA (Taxation and other laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (hereinafter referred to as "the Relaxation Act"). Despite multiple notices and proceedings initiated by the AO in 2021, no final assessment order was issued by 30 September 2021. The petitioner argued that the limitation period had expired, rendering the proceedings invalid. The petitioner sought acceptance of its originally filed return of income as final. Validity of Draft Assessment Order The draft assessment order was passed on 28 September 2021, two days before the extended deadline of 30 September 2021. The AO issued this draft order while complying with Section 144C(1), which mandates issuing a draft order if any variation prejudicial to the assessee is proposed. The petitioner challenged the draft order, arguing that it could not sustain proceedings since no final assessment order was passed within the statutory time frame. The Revenue argued that the draft order was sufficient to satisfy the requirements of the law and that the final order could follow after addressing objections under Section 144C. Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Interplay of Section 144C(13) and Section 153(3) appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: S A N … Continue reading "Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC" The post Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC a… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: S A N … Continue reading "Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC" The post Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: S A N Garments Manufacturing (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 242 (Delhi) Judiciary and Counsel Details Vibhu Bakhru, ACJ & Tushar Rao Gedela, J. R. Santhanam and Rishabh Ostwal, Advs. for the Petitioner. Puneet Rai, SSC, Ashvini Kumar, Rishabh Nangia, JSCs and Nikhil Jain, Adv. for the Respondent. Facts of the Case The assessee filed its return of income for the relevant assessment year and declared its income. Subsequently, notice under section 148 was issued, and the assessment was completed by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A). During the pendency of the appeal, the Direct Tax Vivad Se Vishwas Act, 2020 (DTVSV Act) was enacted. The assessee made a declaration to settle the tax arrear. The Designated Authority (DA) issued Form No. 3 and Form No. 5, determining the balance amount payable and the amount deposited by the assessee. However, the DA again issued a fresh Form No. 3, which was a modified version of the earlier Form No. 3. Aggrieved-assessee filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court contending that the DA had effectively sought to reopen a concluded settlement. High Court Held The High Court held that Section 5(2) of the DTVSV Act mandates the DA to determine the amount payable by the declarant within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the declaration. Rule 7 of the DTVSV Rules expressly provides that the order of the DA with respect to the payment of the amount made by the declarant as per the certificate granted under section 5(1) shall be in Form No. 5. It is clear that once a declarant is issued a certificate (Form No. 5) in terms of section 5 of the DTVSV Act, and the declarant deposits the determined amount, the DA is proscribed from initiating any action or proceedings in respect of the 'tax arrear'. The dispute stands settled. It was fairly stated that no provision under the DTVSV Act empowers a Designated Authority to reopen a concluded settlement. As noted above, a plain reading of the provisions of the DTVSV Act indicates that once a final certificate is issued under section 5(1), all disputes regarding the 'tax arrear' stand concluded. In the instant case, the assessee deposited the determined amount and was issued Form No. 5 by the DA. Thus, all disputes with regard to the 'tax arrear' stood concluded. Therefore, the issuance of the impugned certificate was without the authority of law. The post Designated Authority Has No Power to Reopen a Concluded Settlement Under DTVSV Act | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"CA Kaushik D. Shah – … Continue reading "[Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent" The post [Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" CA Kaushik D. Shah – [2025] 170 taxmann.c… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader [Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"CA Kaushik D. Shah – … Continue reading "[Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent" The post [Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" CA Kaushik D. Shah – [2025] 170 taxmann.com 282 (Article) 1. As per the doctrine of precedent, all lower Courts, Tribunals and authorities exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions are bound by the decisions of the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction these Courts, Tribunals & authorities functions. CIT v. Thana Electricity Supply Ltd. [1994] 206 ITR 727 (Bom). Consolidated Pneumatic Tool Co. (India) Ltd. v. CIT [1995] 79 Taxman 458/[1994] 209 ITR 277 (Bom). In the case of Dr. Shah Faesal v. Union of India [2020] 4 SCC 1 (5-Judge Bench) the Hon Court held that the doctrine of precedents and stare decisis are the core values of our legal system. They form the tools which further the goal of certainty, stability and continuity in our legal system. Arguably, Judges owe a duty to the concept of certainty of law, therefore they justify their holdings by relying upon the established tenets of law. Court also held that the decision rendered by a coordinate Bench is binding on the subsequent Benches of equal or lesser strength. Followed National Insurance Co. Ltd v. Pranay Sethi [2017] 16 SSC 680. 2. Binding Nature of Order of One Bench of Tribunal on Another Bench A decision of a Division Bench and Third Member Bench is binding on the Single Member Bench. A decision of a Special Bench is binding on all the Benches of the Tribunal. A decision of the Special Bench can be distinguished or disregarded if there is any contrary view of the jurisdictional High Court or of the Supreme Court. A co-ordinate Bench should follow the view of another co-ordinate Bench or else refer the matter to a larger Bench through the President. For the sake of uniformity, one Bench of the Tribunal is bound to follow the view expressed by another Bench of the Tribunal unless the earlier view is per incurious – CIT v. L.G. Ramamurthi [1977] 110 ITR 453 (Mad); CIT v. S. Devaraj [1969] 73 ITR 1 (Mad.). Tribunal should not come to a conclusion totally contradictory to the conclusion reached by the earlier Bench of the Tribunal. Where a Bench differs from an earlier Bench, the matter should be referred to a larger Bench – CIT v. Goodlas Nerolac Paints Ltd. [1991] 55 Taxman 484/188 ITR 1 (Bom). Union of India v. Paras Laminates (P.) Ltd. [1990] 186 ITR 722 (SC); Pradip Chandra Parija v. Pramod Chandra Patniak [2002] 122 Taxman 101/254 ITR 99 (SC) One bench cannot differ from the view of another Co-ordinate Bench. Mercedes Benz India (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India [2010] 252 E.L.T. 168 (Bom) ITO v. Baker Technical Services (P.) Ltd. [2010] 125 ITD 1 (Mum) (TM) In case of Hatkesh Co-op Housing Society Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2016] 75 taxmann.com 3/243 Taxman 213 (Bombay) the court observed that that when an identical issue, which had earlier arisen before the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal on identical facts and a view has been taken on the issue then judicial discipline would demand that a subsequent bench of the Tribunal hearing the same issue should follow the view taken by its earlier Coordinate Bench. No doubt this discipline is subject to the well settled exceptions of the earlier order being passed per incurim or sub silentio or in the meantime, there has been any change in law, either statutory or by virtue of judicial pronouncement. If the earlier order does not fall within the exception which affects its binding character before a coordinate bench of the Tribunal, then it has to follow it. However, if the Tribunal has a view different then the view taken by its Coordinate Bench on an identical issue, then the order taking such a different view must record its reasons as to why it does not follow the earlier order of the Tribunal on an identical issue, which could only be on one of the well settled exceptions which affect the binding nature of the earlier order. It could also depart from the earlier view of the Tribunal if there is difference in facts from the earlier order of Coordinate Bench but the same must be recorded in the order. The impugned order is blissfully silent about the reason why it chooses to ignore the earlier decision of the Tribunal rendered after consideration of Sind Co. Op. Hsg. Society (Bom High court), and take a view contrary to that taken by its earlier Coordinate Bench. It is made clear that in case a subsequent bench of the Tribunal does not agree with the reasons indicated in a binding decision of a coordinate bench, then for reason to be recorded, it must request the President of the Tribunal to constitute a larger bench to decide the difference of view on the issue. Non Consideration of decision citied of the Co-ordinate Bench amounts to mistake apparent on record as held in Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. v. CIT [2007] 165 Taxman 307/295 ITR 466 (SC) Special Bench decision of three members should have precedence over Third Member decision. Dy. CIT v. Oman International Bank SAOG [2006] 100 ITD 2185 (Mum.) (SB). Third Member decision is like the decision of Special Bench should be followed in same manner. Click Here To Read The Full Article The post [Opinion] Doctrine of Binding Precedent appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"The Vivad Se Vishwas (VsV) … Continue reading "Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | Applicability" The post Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | … Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | Applicability By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"The Vivad Se Vishwas (VsV) … Continue reading "Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | Applicability" The post Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | Applicability appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" The Vivad Se Vishwas (VsV) 2.0 Scheme is an initiative introduced by the Indian government under the Finance Act, 2024 to resolve pending direct tax disputes. This scheme provides taxpayers and tax authorities with a structured mechanism to settle disputes amicably and avoid prolonged litigation. The VsV 2.0 Scheme is a continuation of the government's efforts to foster a taxpayer-friendly environment by resolving disputes in a transparent and efficient manner while encouraging compliance and trust. By CA. Sailee Gujarathi – Partner | Vipin Gujarathi and Associates Table of Contents Vivad Pe Vishwas? Attempts in the Recent Past Advantages of VsV Relevant Provisions VsV 2.0 – Applicability Amount Payable Under the Scheme Disputed Tax VsV 2.0 Ineligible Disputes/Persons Procedural Aspects Refunds Other Matters TDS Issues Client Interactions on VsV – Practical Considerations Cases Suitable for VsV 2.0 1. Vivad Pe Vishwas? Aata dal ka bhaav toh sabko pata hai, par dispute ka kya? Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2024 2. Attempts in the Recent Past Revenue involved – ~INR 10.5 lakhs crores No. of cases involved – ~6 lakhs Reduction in scrutiny cases Increasing monetary threshold for appeal filing 2016: Direct Tax Dispute Resolution Scheme 2016 2019: Sabka Vishwas (Legacy Dispute Resolution) Scheme -2019 Applicable only for the Indirect Taxes dispute under pre-GST era 2020: The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Act – 2020 2024: The Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Scheme -2024 3. Advantages of VsV Immunity from proceedings Not conceding the tax position Dispute withdrawal Conclusive Another Opportunity 4. Relevant Provisions Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024 Direct Tax Vivad se Vishwas Rules, 2024 Notification 104/2024 CBDT Circular 12 of 2024 (15 October 2024) CBDT Circular 19 of 2024 (16 December 2024) 5. VsV 2.0 – Applicability Appeal or writ or special leave petition filed either by appellant or income tax authority or by both before any appellate forum viz Commissioner (Appeals) or Income Tax Appellate Tribunal or High Court or Supreme Court, and such appeal is pending as on 22 July 2024, or; Objections have been filed before the Dispute Resolution Panel ("DRP") and no directions have been received on or before 22 July 2024, or; DRP has issued directions under Section 144C(5) of the Act, but the Assessing Officer ("AO") has not completed the assessment as on 22 July 2024, or; Application for revision has been filed and is pending before the Commissioner of Income-Tax as on 22 July 2024 Also covers disputes relating to Tax Deducted as Source ("TDS") and Tax Collected at Source ("TCS") VSV 2.0 Applicability Scenarios Appeal was pending on 22 July 2024, got disposed before filing of declaration Appeal not filed, but timeline to file appeal is pending on 22 July 2024 Selective grounds of appeal Multiple Appeals for Same Year Appeal filed before 22 July 2024 along with condonation of delay Additional ground of appeal filed before 22 July 2024 6. Amount Payable Under the Scheme Appeals filed after 31.01.2020 but on or before 22.07.2024 Sr No Nature of tax arrear Amount payable on or before the 31st day of the December, 2024 Amount payable on or before the 01.01.2025 but before *** 1  Disputed Tax including Interest and Penalty thereon Amount of Disputed tax (100% of Disputed tax) Amount of Disputed Tax + 10% of Disputed Tax (110% of Disputed tax) 2 Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee 25% of Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee 30% of Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee *** End date not notified Case Study New Appellant Declaration for VsV in Form 1 done on 25 December 2024 Tax not paid upto 31 December 2024 Whether tax to be paid equivalent to 100% of disputed tax or 110% of disputed tax? Finance Act (No. 2), 2024 CBDT Circular Appeals filed on or before 31.01.2020 Sr No Nature of tax arrear Amount payable on or before the 31st day of the December, 2024 Amount payable on or before the 01.01.2025 but before *** 1 Disputed Tax including Interest and Penalty thereon Amount of Disputed Tax + 10% of Disputed Tax (110% of Disputed tax) Amount of Disputed Tax + 20% of Disputed Tax (120% of Disputed tax) 2 Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee 30% of Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee 35% of Disputed Penalty, Disputed interest or Disputed Fee *** End date not notified Appeal by Department/Covered Issues Sr.  No. Nature of tax arrear Amount payable Condition, if any 1 Appeal/Writ/SLP by Department 50% of amount payable (as determined in earlier slides) 2 Appeal pending before CIT(A) or JCIT(A) and favorable order received from ITAT or High Court on such issue Decision not reversed by higher forum 3 Appeal pending before ITAT and favorable order received from High Court on such issue Decision not reversed by Supreme Court Favourable Order at Same Forum = Favorable orders at SC 7. Disputed Tax Situation Where appeal is pending before Appellate Forum on 22 Jul 2024 Objection filed by appellant before DRP is pending as on SD DRP has issued directions but final order of AO is pending as on SD Revision petition u/s 264 is pending as on SD Disputed Tax Tax that is payable if the appeal/petition/SLP was to be decided against him Amount of Tax payable if DRP was to confirm the variation proposed in draft assessment order Amount of Tax payable as per Asst. Order to be passed by AO as per the directions of DRP Amount of Tax payable as if the revision application will not be accepted Disputed Tax Proviso Where the dispute relates to reduction of MAT credit or AMT credit or reduction of loss or depreciation Appellant has option to Include the amount of tax related to tax credit or loss or depreciation Carry forward reduced tax credit or loss or depreciation in the manner to be prescribed 7.1 Case Study 1 – For Computation of Disputed Tax Particulars AY 2018-19 AY 2019-20 AY 2020-21 Additions during assessment u/s 143(3) (i) Unexplained cash credits 25,000 20,000 60,000 (ii) Disallowance of cash payments 30,000 50,000 40,000 (iii) Disallowance for TDS defaults 50,000 40,000 70,000 (iv) Disallowance u/s 40A(2) 25,000 60,000 90,000 Total Addition by AO 1,30,000 1,70,000 2,60,000 Tax on assessed income 50,000 60,000 105,000 Interest u/s 234B/234C 10,000 15,000 20,000 Penalty 30,000 45,000 80,000 Additions Affirmed by CIT(A) and Pending before ITAT Before 22/7/24 1,30,000 1,70,000 2,60,000 Questions What is the tax payable in VsV (before 31 December 2024 case)? 50,000 60,000 105,000 7.2 Case Study 2 – For Computation of Disputed Tax Particulars AY 2018-19 AY 2019-20 AY 2020-21 Additions Affirmed by ITAT (i) Unexplained cash credits 60,000 (ii) Disallowance of cash payments 30,000 50,000 (iii) Disallowance for TDS defaults 50,000 70,000 (iv) Disallowance u/s 40A(2) 60,000 Total Additions Confirmed by ITAT 80,000 1,10,000 1,30,000 Tax on income after ITAT Additions 24,000 33,000 66,000 Interest u/s 234B/C 4500 11,000 12,000 Penalty u/s 270A 12,000 40,000 55,000 Additions Deleted by ITAT 50,000 60,000 130,000 Tax on deletions 26,000 27,000 39,000 Assessee and Department have filed appeals against all adjustments before High Court 7.3 Case Study – For Carry Forward of Loss/UD Particulars Computed by Assessee in ITR Recomputed by AO Remarks Year 1 Long term capital loss on sale of shares (10,00,000) NIL This is reduction of loss as determined during assessment Year 2 – Long term capital gain (without loss) 10,00,000 As per return of income – Tax paid on Nil (after set off of 10,00,000 from year 1) Year 1 Tax at 20% on loss reduced (10,00,000*20%) 2,00,000 Year 2 Long term capital gain 10,00,000 Less: Loss from Year 1 (10,00,000) Tax on Balance Income NIL Option 1 – Pay the tax in year 1 itself No tax was paid originally in ITR due to loss situation. Now entire loss is ignored and tax is paid in first year itself. 7.4 Case Study 2 – For Carry Forward of Loss/UD Particulars Computed by Assessee in ITR Recomputed by AO Remarks Year 1 Long term capital loss on sale of shares (10,00,000) 0 This is reduction of loss as determined during assessment Year 2 – Long term capital gain (without loss) 10,00,000 As per return of income – Tax paid on Nil (after set off of 10,00,000 from year 1) Year 1 No tax paid – Loss situation Nil Year 2 Long term capital gain 10,00,000 Less: Loss set off NIL Tax on Balance Income 2,00,000 Option 2 – Not Pay Tax in Year 1 Tax carry forward will reduce for year 2. Interest u/s 234B on enhanced income for year 2 will apply. 8. VsV 2.0 Ineligible Disputes/Persons In respect of tax arrears Relating to an assessment year ("AY) of which an assessment or reassessment has been made under section 143(3), 144, 147, 153A or 153C on the basis of search Relating to an AY in respect of which prosecution has been instituted on or before the date of filing of declaration Relating to an undisclosed income from a source outside India or undisclosed asset located outside India Relating to an assessment or reassessment made on the basis of information received under tax information exchange agreements Following Persons Detention order (not revoked or set aside) under Conservation of Foreign Exchange or Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 Prosecution/Convicted for any punishable offence: Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Prosecution instituted by an income-tax authority; or convicted under provisions of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023/enforcement of any civil liability under any law Person notified under section 3 of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 8.1 Case Study – Ineligible Disputes An appeal is filed by assessee for multiple issues as below before CIT(A) Addition of house property income – Rs. 1,00,00,000/- Addition of salary income – Rs. 10,00,000/- Addition of undisclosed income from a source located outside India – Rs. 2,00,000/- Whether taxpayer can opt for VsV 2.0? No 8.2 Case Study – Search Cases Taxpayer has filed appeal on 1 January 2020 Assessment reopened on the basis of documents found during search on another person on 1 January 2017 Assessment order was passed under section 147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act Whether taxpayer is eligible to opt for VsV? Finance Act (No. 2), 2024 Circular 12/2024 8.3 Case Study – Prosecution Prosecution not instituted on 22 July 2024 Prosecution Instituted on 22 December 2024 Whether eligible to opt for VsV 2.0? Prosecution instituted in Year 1 Same issue in year 2, but prosecution not instituted 9. Procedural Aspects Four separate forms have been notified for the purpose of DTVSV Scheme Form 1: Form for filing declaration and Undertaking by the declarant Form 2: Form for Certificate to be issued by Designated Authority Form 3: Form for intimation of payment by declarant Form 4: Order for Full and Final Settlement of tax arrears by Designated Authority Successful VSV Single form qua an order -> Withdrawal of Appeal 10. Refunds Adjustment of payment made earlier Amount not refundable Excess amount paid refundable without interest 11. Other Matters Settling issues in part AR for foreign entity or deceased taxpayers Secondary Adjustment Conceding position Settling penalty appeal while continuing to litigate the associated quantum appeal? Protective v Substantive Additions Multiple Appeals Rectification of order by designated authority 12. TDS Issues Delay in deposit of TDS/TCS Covered under the Scheme Credit of TDS to deductee Credit allowed On date of settlement of dispute. Hence, deductee to bear interest Deductee settles the appeal under VsV Deductor not required to pay tax Interest u/s 201(1A) will continue to apply 13. Client Interactions on VsV – Practical Considerations Understanding the Merits and updated Legal Position Availability of records and documentation Immediate Fund Availability Interest and Penalty Exposures Group Dynamics/Past Restructurings Lapsing Losses IPO Listing or Fund Raising Plans Taxpayer Sentiments 14. Cases Suitable for VsV 2.0 Cost of Litigation > Tax payable Weak records/documentation Adverse Rulings of High Court and Supreme Court Losses are lapsing in future Examples – MFN Clause, Penny Stock (if Scrip is reported) The post Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme 2024 (VsV 2.0) – Advantages | Relevant Provisions | Applicability appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Sanjay Ratra vs. … Continue reading "Reassessment Justified as Information Relating to Unexamined Cash Receipts Was Received After Original Assessment's Conclusion" The post Reassessment Justified as Information… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Reassessment Justified as Information Relating to Unexamined Cash Receipts Was Received After Original Assessment's Conclusion By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Case Details: Sanjay Ratra vs. … Continue reading "Reassessment Justified as Information Relating to Unexamined Cash Receipts Was Received After Original Assessment's Conclusion" The post Reassessment Justified as Information Relating to Unexamined Cash Receipts Was Received After Original Assessment's Conclusion appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Case Details: Sanjay Ratra vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax - [2025] 170 taxmann.com 243 (Bombay) Judiciary and Counsel Details M.S. Sonak & Jitendra Jain, JJ. Ms Rutuja N. Pawar & Ms Hetal Laghave, Advs. for the Petitioner. Akhileshwar Sharma for the Respondent. Facts of the Case The assessee-individual filed his return of income disclosing capital gain income. The said return of income was selected for a scrutiny assessment, and an assessment order under section 143(3) was passed accepting the return of income. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer (AO) issued a reopening notice upon the assessee based on information received that the assessee had received cash of a certain amount, which was undisclosed. Further, the credit card transaction of a certain amount was also required to be verified. The assessee filed objections to the reopening notice and submitted that the cash receipt was from the sale of the property, and the assessee made his submission on the merits as to why the same could not be added as income in his hands. The AO rejected the assessee's submission and issued a reassessment order under section 148. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. High Court Held The High Court held that the issue of alleged cash receipt was not examined during the regular assessment proceedings since the information from AO was received after the conclusion of the assessment proceedings. The assessment proceedings were concluded on 30 November 2018, whereas the information on the alleged cash receipt was received on 21 February 2022. Furthermore, from the questionnaire issued to examine issues in the regular assessment proceedings, there was no query on credit card expenses or alleged cash receipts. Therefore, neither issue appears to have been examined. The assessment order further records that the assessment was limited scrutiny assessment only for verification of deduction under Chapter VI. The assessee has not enclosed the submissions made during the assessment proceedings in the present petition, and therefore, the writ petition was rejected. List of Cases Reviewed Trilochanlal Goyal v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & ors. Writ Petition No. 13342 of 2018 Narendra Kumar Shah v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax & ors. (2024) 465 ITR 385 (Para) distinguished. List of Cases Referred to Hexaware Technologies Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com 225/464 ITR 430 (Bombay) (para 8) Narendra Kumar Shah v. Asstt. CIT [2024] 162 taxmann.com 397/465 ITR 385 (Bombay) (para 9). The post Reassessment Justified as Information Relating to Unexamined Cash Receipts Was Received After Original Assessment's Conclusion appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] Income Tax Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Circular no. SEBI/HO/OIAE/OIAE_IAD-3/P/ON/2025/01650; Dated: 10.01.2025 … Continue reading "SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nomination Facilities in the Indian Securities Market" The post SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nominat… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nomination Facilities in the Indian Securities Market By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Circular no. SEBI/HO/OIAE/OIAE_IAD-3/P/ON/2025/01650; Dated: 10.01.2025 … Continue reading "SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nomination Facilities in the Indian Securities Market" The post SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nomination Facilities in the Indian Securities Market appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Circular no. SEBI/HO/OIAE/OIAE_IAD-3/P/ON/2025/01650; Dated: 10.01.2025 SEBI has revised and revamped norms for existing nomination facilities in the Indian Securities Market. The circular covers various aspects of nomination, grouped under two sections—Section A and B—to be complied with by entities collectively referred to as Regulated entities. Section A deals with norms relating to the reiteration of existing norms to ensure a uniform approach across the Securities Market, and Section B deals with revamped norms. The circular shall be effective from 01.03.2025. Further, investors can nominate up to 10 persons in the account/folio. Power of Attorney (POA) holders of the investor cannot nominate. Also, Regulated entities must have an online mechanism, which will include OTP system, for existing and new investors who want to opt-out of nomination. Click Here To Read The Full Circular The post SEBI Revamps Norms for Existing Nomination Facilities in the Indian Securities Market appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] News Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"Circular No. SEBI/HO/RRD_PoD_TPD/P/CIR/2025/05, Dated: 10.01.2025 … Continue reading "SEBI Prescribes Procedure for Waiver/Reduction of Interest in Recovery Proceedings Due to Non-Payment of Penalties" The post SEBI Prescribes … Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader SEBI Prescribes Procedure for Waiver/Reduction of Interest in Recovery Proceedings Due to Non-Payment of Penalties By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"Circular No. SEBI/HO/RRD_PoD_TPD/P/CIR/2025/05, Dated: 10.01.2025 … Continue reading "SEBI Prescribes Procedure for Waiver/Reduction of Interest in Recovery Proceedings Due to Non-Payment of Penalties" The post SEBI Prescribes Procedure for Waiver/Reduction of Interest in Recovery Proceedings Due to Non-Payment of Penalties appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" Circular No. SEBI/HO/RRD_PoD_TPD/P/CIR/2025/05, Dated: 10.01.2025 SEBI has notified the procedure for seeking a waiver or reduction of interest in recovery proceedings for non-payment of penalties. Powers to waive or reduce interest are delegated to specific panels based on the amount. Applications must meet conditions u/s 220(2A) of the Income-Tax Act, including proving hardship, uncontrollable circumstances, and cooperation. Further, the order on an application must be passed within 12 months from the month of receiving the complete application. Also, no order rejecting the application, either in full or part, must be passed unless the applicant has been given an opportunity of being heard. The circular shall be applicable with immediate effect. Click Here To Read The Full Circular The post SEBI Prescribes Procedure for Waiver/Reduction of Interest in Recovery Proceedings Due to Non-Payment of Penalties appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] News Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"PR No.03/2025, Dated: 11.01.2025 SEBI … Continue reading "SEBI & NISM Hosted 'Samvad' on "Capital for Growth," Fostering Discussions on Securities Market Evolution & Economic Growth" The post SEBI & NISM Hos… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader SEBI & NISM Hosted 'Samvad' on "Capital for Growth," Fostering Discussions on Securities Market Evolution & Economic Growth By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"PR No.03/2025, Dated: 11.01.2025 SEBI … Continue reading "SEBI & NISM Hosted 'Samvad' on "Capital for Growth," Fostering Discussions on Securities Market Evolution & Economic Growth" The post SEBI & NISM Hosted 'Samvad' on "Capital for Growth," Fostering Discussions on Securities Market Evolution & Economic Growth appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" PR No.03/2025, Dated: 11.01.2025 SEBI and NISM, in collaboration with NSE, BSE, NSDL, and CDSL, hosted Samvad – A Symposium on Securities Market on 10.01.2025, in Mumbai. The event was graced by Shri Suman Bery, Vice Chairman of NITI Aayog, as the Chief Guest with Shri Challa Sreenivasulu Setty, Chairperson of SBI, delivering the keynote address. Ms. Madhabi Puri Buch, Chairperson of SEBI, addressed the gathering, sharing her vision on the way forward for India's capital markets. Click Here To Read The Full Press Release The post SEBI & NISM Hosted 'Samvad' on "Capital for Growth," Fostering Discussions on Securities Market Evolution & Economic Growth appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] News Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

​    [[{"value":"This document delves into the … Continue reading "Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetary and Non-Monetary Items" The post Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetar… Read on blog or Reader Gupta Chandan & Associates Read on blog or Reader Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetary and Non-Monetary Items By on January 16, 2025  ​    [[{"value":"This document delves into the … Continue reading "Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetary and Non-Monetary Items" The post Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetary and Non-Monetary Items appeared first on Taxmann Blog."}]] [[{"value":" This document delves into the accounting treatment of foreign currency transactions under Ind AS 21, focusing on three key scenarios: a foreign currency loan, a machinery purchase, and a prepayment for inventory. It provides guidance on the initial measurement of transactions at the exchange rate on the transaction date and subsequent treatment, including retranslation for monetary items and the use of historical exchange rates for non-monetary items. Detailed analysis is provided to address the challenges in identifying monetary and non-monetary items, with references to relevant provisions such as Para 8, 16, 23, and 24 of Ind AS 21. The document emphasizes compliance to ensure accuracy, consistency, and comparability in financial reporting, aiding the company in maintaining transparent and reliable financial statements. Click Here To Read The Full Story The post Accounting for Foreign Currency Transactions and Distinguishing Monetary and Non-Monetary Items appeared first on Taxmann Blog. "}]] News Archives - Taxmann Blog Read More  Comment

Gupta Chandan & Associates © 2025. Manage your email settings or unsubscribe. Get the Jetpack app Subscribe, bookmark, and get real‑time notifications - all from one app! Automattic, Inc. 60 29th St. #343, San Francisco, CA 94110