Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the demand raised under Section 115QA of the Finance Act, 2013 should be stayed pending hearing on the ground that, prima facie, the levy is confined to buy-back transactions covered by Section 77A of the Companies Act, 1956.
Analysis: The Court noted that the levy under Section 115QA was, on a prima facie reading, confined by the non obstante clause to the transactions defined in the provision itself. It also observed that the transactions then contemplated were those covered by Section 77A of the Companies Act, 1956. The Court further relied on the subsequent amendment expanding the definition of buy-back beyond Section 77A, and treated the absence of retrospective effect as supporting the petitioner's position at the interim stage.
Conclusion: The impugned demand to the extent it sought to recover levy under Section 115QA was directed not to be enforced until the next date of hearing, in favour of the petitioner.