Slump sale and going concern transfer turn on substance over labels, shaping tax treatment and succession liability.
A slump sale is a transfer of an undertaking as a whole for lump sum consideration without separate valuation of individual assets and liabilities, with capital gains governed by section 50B. A transfer described as a "going concern" does not automatically qualify as a slump sale, because the controlling test is the substance of the transaction-what is transferred, how it is transferred, and what is retained. In succession settings, section 170 may treat the transferee as a successor for tax purposes. (AI Summary)

GST book finalization requires vendor KYC, credit note review, HSN checks, and reconciliation across returns, imports, and refunds.
Finalization of GST books for March-April 2026 requires a structured review of vendor onboarding, input tax credit, outward supply records, and tax-rate changes in light of GST 2.0. Special attention is needed for vendors registered under the new three-day registration framework, including KYC validation and, where appropriate, physical verification of premises. Credit notes, discounts, HSN classification, GSTR-2B reconciliation, import and reverse charge liabilities, place of supply positions, state-wise reporting, income tax reconciliation, and inverted duty structure refunds must also be reviewed. (AI Summary)

Ultra-processed foods and SOSA risks drive labelling, reformulation, and consumer awareness under evolving food safety regulation.
Ultra-processed packaged foods characterised by high levels of salt, oil, sugar and additives (SOSA) are described as industrially manufactured products designed for convenience, long shelf life and hyper-palatability rather than nutritional integrity. High consumption is linked with obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, certain cancers, nutritional displacement and possible gut and metabolic effects. The regulatory framework emphasises front-of-pack labelling, control of additives and ingredients, reformulation, trans fat limits and consumer awareness, while guidance favours limiting ultra-processed foods and prioritising fresh, minimally processed foods. (AI Summary)

Imported packaged goods compliance under legal metrology rules depends on proper labelling, customs checks, and coordinated enforcement.
Imported pre-packaged consumer goods must comply with the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 by carrying mandatory declarations on the principal display panel, and the importer is treated as the manufacturer for compliance purposes. The commentary identifies widespread non-compliance through missing declarations, improper labelling, absence of country-of-origin details, and non-standard units, while noting enforcement gaps at customs ports and limited coordination between Customs and the Legal Metrology Department. It recommends stronger system integration, pre-clearance checks, dedicated port-level enforcement, stricter penalties, and tighter regulation of e-commerce imports. (AI Summary)

Tax compliance scrutiny intensifies as data triangulation exposes restaurant sales suppression and broader B2C reporting gaps.
Tax authorities are intensifying compliance scrutiny of restaurants and broader B2C businesses through data triangulation across POS systems, aggregator platforms, utility usage, banking transactions, GST filings and income-tax returns. The commentary identifies common irregularities such as bill deletion or modification, non-reporting of banquet bookings, fake purchase bills, under-reporting of aggregator sales, and mismatches between input and output data, and recommends transparent reporting, advance reconciliation and close monitoring of cash flows and specified financial transactions. (AI Summary)

Combination control under competition law balances merger review, suspensory notification and competition assessment before deal completion.
The Competition Act, 2002 regulates combinations-mergers, acquisitions and amalgamations-through a suspensory notification regime administered by the Competition Commission of India. A transaction is notifiable when the prescribed asset, turnover or deal value thresholds are met, subject to de minimis and other exemptions. The Commission assesses whether the combination is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition and may approve, conditionally approve with remedies, or reject the transaction within the statutory time limit. (AI Summary)

GST refund of statutory pre-deposit cannot be denied by rigid limitation after a successful appeal.
Refund of statutory pre-deposit under GST cannot be denied merely on the ground that the refund application was filed beyond the two-year period mentioned in Section 54 of the CGST Act. Where an assessee deposits the mandatory pre-deposit for maintaining an appeal and the appellate authority allows the appeal, the pre-deposit becomes refundable as a substantive right and the department cannot retain it without authority of law. The limitation provision must be read with Article 265, the legislative use of "may", and the absence of unjust enrichment where the amount was paid from the assessee's own funds. (AI Summary)

Input tax credit protection for bona fide buyers limits GST denial to collusive or fraudulent supplier default cases.
Input tax credit under GST cannot be denied to a bona fide recipient merely because the supplier later defaults in payment of tax or has its registration cancelled at a later stage, where the purchaser has otherwise complied with the conditions under Section 16(2) and the transaction is not collusive or fraudulent. The Karnataka High Court treated the buyer's genuine transaction as protected from disallowance under Section 16(2)(c), and read that provision down so that it applies only where the transaction is not bona fide or is designed to defraud revenue. (AI Summary)

Symbolic possession in CIRP is unsupported; actual control and custody by the resolution professional govern asset handover.
Symbolic possession under SARFAESI is a paper possession of secured property without physical control, but the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code requires the Interim Resolution Professional to take actual control and custody of the corporate debtor's assets on commencement of CIRP. The article examines whether, in a section 10 CIRP, a corporate debtor may hand over only symbolic possession to the Interim Resolution Professional. Referring to the Orion Water Treatment Private Limited case, it notes that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal found no legal basis for symbolic possession in CIRP and upheld actual handover of assets, records, and cooperation. (AI Summary)

Income tax transition planning demands year-end compliance, revised TDS/TCS filings, and careful regime selection before new rules begin.
Transition to the Income Tax Act 2025 and Income Tax Rules 2026 requires taxpayers to complete year-end compliance steps before 31 March 2026, including correction of TDS/TCS returns, filing of the new low or nil TDS certificate form, and completion of transitional actions arising from the new regime. The article also notes changes in TDS/TCS rates and thresholds from 1 April 2026, revised budgeting for business and professional taxpayers, and the need to evaluate regime choice and tax provisioning for the coming year. (AI Summary)

Due diligence in business transfers shapes valuation, risk allocation, disclosures, and compliance across Indian merger and acquisition deals.
Due diligence in business transfers under the Indian legal framework is a structured risk-assessment and compliance review undertaken before mergers, acquisitions, slump sales, asset purchases, share transfers, and business transfer arrangements. It examines legal, financial, operational, tax, regulatory, labour, environmental, intellectual property, property, and insurance issues so that valuation, transaction structure, representations and warranties, indemnities, and post-closing obligations are properly informed. Buyer's due diligence is exhaustive and risk-focused, while seller's due diligence is used to identify red flags, regularise compliance gaps, prepare disclosures, and reduce negotiation friction. (AI Summary)

Section 75 taxpayer protections shape GST adjudication through hearing rights, demand limits, quantified interest, and time-bound orders.
Section 75 of the CGST Act, 2017 is presented as a taxpayer-protective framework covering adjudication, hearing, demand restriction, interest, penalty, and limitation. The article highlights that personal hearing is mandatory in adverse orders, adjournments are limited, and the adjudication demand cannot exceed the show cause notice. It also explains that interest should be quantified in the show cause notice, while the Allahabad High Court is cited for holding that section 75(9) cannot cure failure to quantify interest at the notice stage. (AI Summary)

Advance Authorisation scheme balances duty-free input imports with export obligation, value addition, and strict end-use compliance.
Advance Authorisation under the Foreign Trade Policy 2023 permits duty-free import of inputs for manufacture of export goods, subject to strict end-use, export obligation, and value addition requirements. The scheme may be issued on the basis of SION, self-declaration, Norms Committee fixation, or the Self Ratification Scheme, and is available mainly to manufacturer exporters and merchant exporters linked with supporting manufacturers. It grants exemption from major customs and trade-related levies, incorporates pre-import and actual user conditions, allows domestic sourcing through Advance Release Order or Invalidation Letter, and requires export obligation fulfilment within the prescribed period, with regularisation and EODC closure procedures. (AI Summary)

Clean slate doctrine under IBC can extinguish pre-approval GST demands and bar fresh post-resolution claims.
An approved resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code can extinguish pre-approval GST liabilities because IBC prevails over inconsistent tax law and operates with a moratorium during CIRP. Creditors, including GST authorities, must file claims within the insolvency process, and liabilities not provided for in the resolution framework cannot ordinarily be revived later. Under the clean slate doctrine, an approved resolution plan binds all stakeholders, including government authorities, and bars fresh demands for pre-resolution liabilities. (AI Summary)

Arbitration awards and GST depend on whether each claim is additional consideration or compensatory payment.
Arbitration awards arising from construction and infrastructure contracts must be analysed component-wise for GST purposes, because different claims within the same award may have different tax consequences. Amounts awarded for additional work, price escalation, or upward revision of contract value retain the character of consideration for supply and are liable to GST, while amounts awarded as compensation for breach of contract, liquidated damages, loss, delay, or reimbursement of damage do not constitute consideration for supply and fall outside GST. The timing of payment does not by itself exclude taxability where the award revises contract value upward under the transitional framework. (AI Summary)

Bona fide baggage and mandatory customs safeguards govern passenger jewellery, not suspicion based on gold purity alone.
Jewellery worn as personal adornment forms part of bona fide baggage, and gold is not a prohibited item merely because of its purity or weight. The article stresses that seizure cannot rest on the presence of 24-carat gold when the article is used personal jewellery, and that customs law regulates import, not personal adornment. It further states that a proper show cause notice, personal hearing, and compliance with seizure timelines are mandatory procedural safeguards that cannot be bypassed through airport waiver forms. (AI Summary)

Natural justice in reassessment requires notice to the correct counterparty and current address before adverse tax action.
Correct identification of the counterparty and its current address is essential in tax enquiry and reassessment proceedings. Where the revenue proceeds on information relating to one entity, but the assessee states that transactions were actually with another entity, the authority must verify the correct party and current location before drawing adverse conclusions. If notice and enquiry are issued in the wrong name and the alleged non-existence of the correct entity is never put to the assessee, the proceeding is vulnerable for breach of natural justice and denial of a meaningful opportunity to explain the transactions. (AI Summary)

Local authority status under GST determines the applicable works contract rate for Delhi Jal Board contracts and related notices.
The dispute concerns whether works contracts awarded by the Delhi Jal Board attract GST at 12% or 18%, depending on whether the Delhi Jal Board qualifies as a local authority under Section 2(69) of the CGST Act, 2017. The GST department disputed that status, while the contractor claimed the concessional rate had already been applied and tax deposited. The issue was treated as a legal question requiring adjudication, and proceedings pursuant to the impugned show cause notice were stayed, with counter affidavits directed. (AI Summary)

Territorial jurisdiction and CBIC circulars remain distinct: the cause of action, not headquarters, governs the writ forum.
CBIC circulars issued under statutory authority operate uniformly across India and are binding on departmental officers, but their pan-India applicability does not determine territorial jurisdiction under Article 226. Jurisdiction depends on where the cause of action wholly or partly arises, and the place from which the circular is issued is not, by itself, a constitutive fact for jurisdiction. A writ challenge must be anchored to the territorial location of the seizure, assessment, adjudication, recovery, or other field action through which the circular is applied or misapplied. (AI Summary)

Limitation and delayed filing by enforcement agencies are criticised for wasting judicial resources and triggering dismissal as time barred.
Delays in filing appeals and special leave petitions by the Directorate of Enforcement are criticised as avoidable litigation that consumes judicial and public resources. A belated special leave petition was rejected as time barred because the explanation for delay was found absolutely insufficient, and another appeal was dismissed where delay was not satisfactorily explained and limitation was treated as running from the date of pronouncement of the challenged order. The text stresses prompt filing, discipline, and avoidance of unnecessary litigation. (AI Summary)