Pecuniary jurisdiction under CBDT Instruction No. 1/2011 determines whether an Income Tax Officer or Assistant Commissioner may issue a Section 143(2) scrutiny notice, based on returned income. Where returned income places an assessee within Income Tax Officer jurisdiction, a notice issued by an Assistant Commissioner lacks lawful pecuniary authority. Section 124(3), being confined to territorial-jurisdiction objections, does not cure that defect. A valid scrutiny notice from the competent authority is indispensable to assessment validity; a notice issued without such authority renders the assessment void ab initio.

Foreign tax credit under Sections 90 and 90A cannot be denied solely because Form 67 was filed after the prescribed due date where the form was subsequently furnished. Filing Form 67 was treated as a directory, rather than mandatory, procedural requirement for claiming credit, with judicial consistency applied to the same assessee's succeeding assessment year. The foreign tax credit claim remains allowable subject to verification of relevant facts for consequential computation.

Delayed furnishing of Form 10B does not by itself defeat exemption under section 11 where the audit report was available to the CPC before return processing under section 143(1). The prescribed filing timeline is procedural and directory, and availability of the report before processing constitutes substantial compliance. Rejection of a delay-condonation request under section 119(2)(b) does not extinguish the appellate remedy for the exemption claim.

Section 68 could not treat consideration received on the sale of unlisted shares as unexplained cash credit where the original investments had been accepted in prior scrutiny assessments. Purchase and sale records, books of account, bank statements, confirmations, tax returns, audited financial statements, and purchaser particulars supported the transactions. The purchasers also responded to enquiries with supporting material. In the absence of defects in that evidence or independent material disproving purchaser identity, creditworthiness, or transaction genuineness, the documented share-sale proceeds remained outside unexplained cash-credit treatment.

Furnishing the audit report in Form No. 10B within the Section 139(1) deadline is treated as a procedural and directory requirement for claiming charitable exemption under Section 11. Delayed filing does not automatically invalidate an otherwise valid exemption claim. The availability of condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) does not preclude appellate consideration of the exemption claim where Form No. 10B was filed late.

Section 148 reassessment notices must be issued by an officer having pecuniary jurisdiction under the applicable CBDT allocation instruction. For non-corporate assessees in mofussil areas whose returned income exceeds the prescribed threshold, jurisdiction lies with an Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner rather than an Income-tax Officer. Issuance of a reassessment notice by an Income-tax Officer lacking that inherent jurisdiction renders the notice invalid. The reassessment proceedings and consequential assessment founded on that notice are void ab initio and cannot be sustained.

Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which governs minimum alternate tax, does not apply to banking companies regulated under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Precedent had resolved the applicability issue against the Revenue. Pending related matters before the Supreme Court do not alter the position that banking companies governed by the Banking Regulation Act fall outside Section 115JB.

Personal hearing at the original adjudication stage is necessary in proceedings concerning unpaid or short-paid tax, erroneous refunds, or improper input-tax availment where the taxpayer must produce books of account and explain relevant issues. Fixing only a date for a written reply does not provide that meaningful opportunity. Failure to afford a personal hearing at the original stage vitiates the proceedings, and an appellate opportunity cannot cure the defect where the appellate order does not adequately address it.

Ex parte demand orders under Section 73(9) may be set aside where bona fide and unavoidable circumstances prevented the noticee from replying to a show-cause notice and submitting supporting documents. A justice-oriented approach requires a reasonable opportunity to respond and participate in adjudication. The demand order was set aside, and fresh adjudication was directed after permitting submission of a reply and supporting documents.

The identified CGST issues concern whether a consolidated show cause notice may cover multiple financial years, the limitation period under section 74(10), issuance of notices under section 74(1), separate year-wise adjudication, and quasi-judicial fairness in taxation. Notice was issued on an application for condonation of delay and on a Special Leave Petition, with dasti service permitted. The listed GST issues remain without a stated substantive determination on limitation, validity of a consolidated notice, or the required adjudication process.

Pecuniary jurisdiction limits under the applicable CBDT instruction required reassessment of a non-corporate assessee in a mofussil area exceeding the prescribed limit to be handled by an Assistant or Deputy Commissioner, rather than an Income-tax Officer. As the reassessment notice was issued by an officer lacking that jurisdiction and the defect was unrebutted, the notice was inherently invalid. The consequential assessment was quashed as void ab initio, rendering the remaining grounds academic.

ISIN limits for privately placed debt securities are revised to permit up to seventeen ISINs maturing in a financial year, with additional ISINs for eligible capital gains tax debt securities. Twelve ISINs are available for plain vanilla debt securities, subject to further ISINs after prescribed outstanding-amount thresholds, and five are available for specified structured and debt-capital instruments. Legacy ISINs in those categories are grandfathered subject to restrictions on new issuance. Government serviced, extra-budgetary resources and ESG debt securities are excluded from ISIN-limit calculations.

Credit Risk-o-Meter disclosure is mandatory for specified listed and proposed-to-be-listed debt securities in offering documents, advertisements, and Online Bond Platform Provider web and mobile interfaces. The meter must map credit ratings to six colour-coded risk levels, display the lowest rating where multiple ratings exist, and identify the rating agency, actual rating, and unsecured status where applicable. OBPPs must use registered credit-rating agency data, automate rating-change updates, prohibit manual overrides, retain audit trails, and prominently display the meter before investment action buttons.

Eligible issuers may omit merchant banker appointment for private placements of debt securities only if they are regulated by an Indian financial-sector regulator, have been listed for at least one year without pending listing-compliance fines or penalties, and have made no specified payment defaults during the preceding three financial years and current financial year. Statutory-auditor certification is required. The debt must be senior or unsubordinated and secured by a first or pari passu charge, subject to the stated public-sector exception, and must carry a rating of at least AA-.

National Land Monetization Corporation is facilitating a two-phase e-tender-cum-e-auction of 459 encumbrance-free land parcels of Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited through the RailTel E-Nivida e-Procurement Platform. Participation requires registration, fulfilment of prescribed requirements and submission of earnest money deposit within the applicable deadlines. Physical and online mock e-auction training familiarises prospective bidders with the bidding interface and participation procedure. Investor outreach provides information on plot details, eligibility requirements, registration and bidding conditions.

TDS applicability to electricity-bill payments made to a state electricity distribution company is questioned where aggregate payments during a financial year exceed the stated threshold. The issue is whether such payments fall within the scope of withholding under section 194Q.

Fresh assessments following remand to the Dispute Resolution Panel remain governed by the limitation period under Section 153(2A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Section 144C creates a time-bound assessment framework involving the Panel. Its exclusion of Section 153 for passing a final assessment order after receipt of Panel directions is limited to that stage and does not displace the limitation applicable where remand requires a fresh determination. As Panel proceedings continue the assessment process, remanded fresh assessments completed beyond the prescribed period are time-barred.

Madhya Pradesh SGST exemption notification is amended to replace its reference to Schedule IV of the earlier rate notification with Schedule II of the notification dated 19 September 2025. Made under the State Government's exemption power under the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, on the Council's recommendations, the amendment takes effect from 22 September 2025.

The Data Protection Board of India is established under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, effective from publication in the Official Gazette. It is constituted to exercise powers conferred on it and perform functions assigned under that Act, with its head office situated in the National Capital Region of India.

Registered persons whose aggregate turnover in any financial year does not exceed two crore rupees are exempted from furnishing the annual return under the first proviso to section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Coverage begins with financial year 2024-25 and subsequent financial years, and the measure is deemed effective from 17 September 2025.