Rule 3(d) is amended by replacing "State Government/Union Territories" with "Central Government/State Government/Union Territories." The change adds the Central Government to the governmental entities expressly named in the provision while retaining State Governments and Union Territories. The amendment is confined to the institutional description in rule 3(d).

Unregistered investment advisory services are prohibited under the SEBI Act and the Investment Advisers Regulations. Where advisory services were admittedly provided without registration, the activity was unlawful and fees collected through it were refundable to all affected clients. The refund obligation was not limited to investors who had submitted individual complaints, as the unlawfulness attached to the unregistered activity and the fees collected from every client through that activity.

Interception, monitoring and decryption safeguards are amended by replacing "security agency" in rule 23(1) with "competent authority and the security agency". The provision therefore covers the competent authority alongside the security agency. The amendment takes effect upon publication in the Official Gazette.

Interception, monitoring and decryption of information in computer resources require a reasoned direction by the competent authority, issued only where other reasonable means cannot obtain the information. Emergency action requires written intimation and competent-authority approval, failing which the activity must cease. Directions must identify the targeted information or persons, name the officer authorised to receive the information, remain time-bound, and be subject to review. Authorised agencies, intermediaries, persons in charge of computer resources and decryption key holders must provide specified assistance, maintain records and preserve secrecy; use and disclosure are confined to investigation, authorised security-agency sharing and judicial proceedings.

Statutory appeals must be filed within the prescribed two-month limitation period, with delay condonable only for a further 30 days. An appeal filed after both periods is time-barred and may be declined. Acknowledged service of the original order, a reply to the show-cause notice, and participation in the personal hearing support the conclusion that procedural opportunity was available. A substantially delayed writ petition does not ordinarily warrant discretionary relief against rejection of such an appeal.

GST refund claims may bundle successive tax periods across financial years. Accumulated input tax credit refunds under an inverted duty structure exclude identical input and output goods affected only by a later rate reduction. For non-zero-rated and non-deemed-export tax refunds, cash and electronic credit ledger components must be returned in their original proportions, with the credit component re-credited through FORM GST PMT-03. Accumulated input tax credit refunds are restricted to supplier-furnished invoices reflected in FORM GSTR-2A, and Annexure B requires HSN/SAC details where stated on inward invoices.

Foreign-currency loans advanced to overseas associated enterprises require an economically comparable arm's-length benchmark; LIBOR-linked rates are appropriate where the loans are received and used abroad, unlike Indian corporate-bond yields. A royalty CUP comparison requires materially comparable uncontrolled transactions, including comparable territories, trademarks, products and market conditions; an undisplaced TNMM analysis supports the existing royalty treatment. Recurring market research for established products remains revenue expenditure where it creates no identifiable capital asset, and unsupported ad hoc expense disallowances are not sustainable. For industrial-undertaking deductions, manufacturing by-product and scrap sales satisfy the direct-nexus requirement, whereas machinery lease rent does not.

Jurisdiction covers Chapter IX contraventions within the officer's State or Union Territory, with the location of the computer system or network determining where a complaint is made. Complaints use the prescribed form and a fee linked to compensation claimed. Respondents may plead guilty or show cause, while the officer may dismiss the matter or conduct inquiry after considering reports, evidence and submissions. Electronic records may be relied upon, and matters disclosing offences requiring punishment rather than financial consequences must be transferred for criminal jurisdiction.

The 2009 amendment substitutes rule 10 of the 2003 service-condition rules governing the Tribunal's Presiding Officer. It entitles the Presiding Officer to house rent allowance at the rate applicable from time to time to a Group 'A' Central Government officer drawing equivalent pay. The amended rule took effect upon publication in the Official Gazette.

Service conditions for the Presiding Officer of the Cyber Regulations Appellate Tribunal aligned salary, allowances and benefits with those admissible to a Secretary to the Government of India and treated the officer as a public servant. Pay of retired appointees was reduced by applicable pension, provident-fund contribution or other retirement benefits. Leave, travel, accommodation, medical facilities, pension and provident-fund coverage generally followed Secretary-level or Group A Central Government standards, with residual matters governed by Group A service rules.

Depreciation under the applicable entry extends to an aircraft operated as an aeroplane, as the expression "aircraft" is broader and an aeroplane falls within the specified category. A restrictive reading confined to aero-engines or vehicle parts does not apply. The aircraft therefore qualified for depreciation at 40%, sustaining the assessee's claimed allowance.

Monitoring and collection of traffic data or information is confined to reasoned directions of the competent authority for specified cyber-security purposes. Authorised government agencies, intermediaries, and persons controlling computer resources must use designated officers, maintain requisition records, provide required access and cooperation, and preserve secrecy. Unauthorised monitoring is prohibited, while limited service-related access is permitted when reasonably necessary for operations, security, forensic work, or tracing harmful contraventions. Review oversight, record destruction requirements, restricted use of collected information, and strict confidentiality govern the process.

Long-term capital loss on a documented share sale to an unrelated purchaser remains allowable unless evidence establishes that the apparent transaction is false; tax reduction alone does not make it sham. Shares consistently held as investments, with delivery and limited transactions, generate capital rather than business losses. Advertising, brand, trademark, business-development, professional, and premises-rent costs supporting operations without creating a capital asset are revenue expenditure. No notional interest arises on an interest-free advance where sufficient interest-free funds exist and no borrowed-fund nexus is shown. Short tax deduction at source does not trigger expenditure disallowance. Exchange gain on borrowing for capital assets is capital in character. Accrued zero-coupon debenture premium is proportionately deductible where the recipient is unidentifiable at year-end, and a valid deduction claim may be considered on appeal despite omission from the return.

TNVAT's inclusive definition of manufacture covers the production, extraction and processing involved in lignite mining, including removal of overburden, excavation, conveyance and stacking. Capital goods used to produce lignite for taxable sale qualify for input tax credit. Credit is, however, restricted to the proportion attributable to taxable lignite sales and is unavailable where lignite is used to generate exempt electricity. A pre-existing clarification allowing concessional treatment for relevant mining operations continues under the savings provision where it is not inconsistent with TNVAT provisions.

Pending Central Excise and Service Tax appeals filed on or after 1 July 2017, concerning pre-GST actions or omissions, are assigned to identified officers for appellate disposal in the Bengaluru Zone. The assignment covers appeals under Section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and Section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994. Officers designated for each listed appeal must pass Orders-in-Appeal under the corresponding statutory provision. The allocation matrix identifies 500 appeals by appeal number, assessee, registration particulars, and assigned officer.

Appeals filed on or after 1 July 2017 under section 35 of the Central Excise Act, 1944, or section 85 of the Finance Act, 1994, are subject to a re-assignment of appellate jurisdiction. The identified appeals are allotted to the Principal Commissioner, CGST and Central Excise, Nagpur Audit Commissionerate, for passing Orders-in-Appeal under the applicable enactment.

Any person seeking blocking must lodge a complaint with the Nodal Officer of the concerned organisation; the Designated Officer cannot entertain direct complaints or requests. The organisation examines whether blocking is required on the specified statutory grounds and forwards a complete written request in the prescribed form. A committee examines the request and sample content, while identified persons or intermediaries ordinarily receive notice and an opportunity to respond. The Secretary's approval is required before the Designated Officer directs a Government agency or intermediary to block public access.

Specified Central Excise and service-tax appeals filed on or after 1 July 2017 are reassigned, entry by entry, to designated Commissioners for passing Orders-in-Appeal. Each matter is identified through its appeal number, assessee or concerned party, registration particulars and allotted officer. The allocation covers Kolkata South and Kolkata North appeal references, operates under the Central Excise and Service Tax Rules together with the GST savings framework for legacy matters, and partially modifies the appellate allocation made on 7 April 2025.

Investigation of alleged misbehaviour or incapacity of the Chairperson or Members of the Cyber Appellate Tribunal follows a staged process under the Information Technology Act. A written complaint containing definite charges undergoes preliminary scrutiny by the Central Government. Where investigation is considered necessary, a three-member Committee comprising officials from the Cabinet Secretariat, the information technology department and the legal affairs department conducts the investigation, may record complainant evidence and collect relevant material, and submits findings to the President within the specified period.

Alleged bogus purchases are not fully taxable where the underlying purchases are not wholly fictitious, even if suppliers differ from those recorded in the books. Taxable income is limited to the profit element embedded in such purchases rather than the full purchase price. The addition is confined to 12.5% of the alleged purchases as the estimated embedded profit, notwithstanding repeated non-compliance during assessment and first appellate proceedings.