Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
A composite scheme of amalgamation and demerger, once approved by shareholders and creditors, could not be narrowed by directing a separate demerger application or by altering the scheme's material terms. The NCLAT held that the scheme identified the amalgamated company, resulting company and demerged undertaking with sufficient specificity, and that demerger was an integral consequence of the sanctioned composite scheme under Sections 230 to 232. It also corrected factual errors in the sanction order concerning the effective date, the identity of the resulting company, and an unnecessary rider tied to an unadmitted petition. The order was set aside to the extent inconsistent with the approved scheme, while statutory dues, stamp duty, taxes and compliance obligations remained fully preserved.
A composite scheme of amalgamation and demerger, once approved by shareholders and creditors, could not be narrowed by directing a separate demerger application or by altering the scheme's material terms. The NCLAT held that the scheme identified the amalgamated company, resulting company and demerged undertaking with sufficient specificity, and that demerger was an integral consequence of the sanctioned composite scheme under Sections 230 to 232. It also corrected factual errors in the sanction order concerning the effective date, the identity of the resulting company, and an unnecessary rider tied to an unadmitted petition. The order was set aside to the extent inconsistent with the approved scheme, while statutory dues, stamp duty, taxes and compliance obligations remained fully preserved.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
