Loading...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 News - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Category: ?
Categorized by AI
---- All Categories ----
  • ---- All Categories ----
  • Income Tax
  • GST
  • Customs, DGFT & SEZ
  • FEMA & RBI
  • Corp. Laws, SEBI & IBC
  • PMLA, Black Money & ED
  • Budget
  • News and Press Release
  • PTI News
Month:
---- All Months ----
  • ---- All Months ----
  • January
  • February
  • March
  • April
  • May
  • June
  • July
  • August
  • September
  • October
  • November
  • December
Year:
---- All Years ----
  • ---- All Years ----
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
Relevance Default Date
    Minutes of the Monetary Policy Committee Meeting, February 4 to 6, 2026 [Under Section 45ZL of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934]
    US trade deal has become an ordeal: Congress slams PM Modi
    Nothing changes, India will be paying tariffs; we will not be paying tariffs: Trump after SC ruling
    Trump seethes over Supreme Court justices who opposed him on tariffs, especially those he appointed
    The Latest: Trump says he'll sign executive order to enact 10 per cent global tariff
    Which Trump tariffs did Supreme Court strike down? Here's what to know
    The Latest: Trump addresses press after Supreme Court strikes down his sweeping tariffs
    No change in trade deal with India; it is on: Trump after SC verdict
    Trump says he used tariffs to end war between India, Pakistan as he lashes out at US Supreme Court verdict
    Trump says he'll sign executive order to enact 10 per cent global tariff after US Supreme Court defeat,
    Trump says he's 'absolutely ashamed' of US Supreme Court justices who issued 'deeply disappointing'  tariff decision
    Congress slams govt for agreeing to trade deal after US Supreme Court strikes down Trump's tariffs
    Refunds may be available on some tariffs applied to goods from India: US Chamber of Commerce after SC ruling
    What to know about the Supreme Court ruling on tariffs
    Trump's made tariffs central to his presidency, chaos may come next
    The Supreme Court struck down some of Trump's most sweeping tariffs; Which levies are impacted?
    'Walking away' from recent deals does not seem to be in cards for America's partners: Ex-trade official
    Exporters hail US Supreme Court's decision on Trump tariff
    Trump has other tariff options after Supreme Court strikes down his worldwide import taxes
    SC ruling on Trump's tariffs: Judge refers to tariffs imposed on India for buying Russian oil in dissenting note
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

+

Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

NOTE:

News
Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
Results Found:
Show All Summaries Hide All Summaries
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Policy repo rate unchanged; MPC retains neutral stance as inflation stays benign while growth outlook strengthens.
Under Section 45ZL the MPC's minutes record a unanimous decision to keep the policy repo rate unchanged and to retain the neutral stance after reviewing staff projections, surveys and alternative risk scenarios. The committee judged growth prospects to have strengthened while headline inflation remains benign though modestly revised upward for near quarters due mainly to precious metals; risks to the outlook are broadly balanced and policy will be guided by incoming data and the progress of transmission.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Constitutional limits on presidential tariff power overturned global tariffs, reshaping the interim India-US trade deal consequences.
The US Supreme Court invalidated the President's global tariffs imposed under emergency powers, finding tariff authority lies with Congress; the decision undercuts executive unilateral tariff measures. The India-US interim agreement saw an Executive Order lifting prior punitive tariffs in return for India's energy purchasing commitments, and a reduced reciprocal tariff rate was agreed. Indian political opposition alleges the deal's timing reflected executive haste that risked sovereign bargaining leverage and domestic agricultural interests.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Presidential tariff authority curtailed; temporary global import duty imposed to rebalance trade while India trade framework remains intact.
The Supreme Court held that the President exceeded authority in imposing sweeping tariffs; in response the President signed a Proclamation imposing a temporary import duty to address international payments problems and rebalance trade relationships, effective on a specified date for a limited period. The President stated that an interim trade framework with India remains in place, removing certain punitive tariffs on India under an Executive Order while asserting India will assume tariff obligations under the bilateral arrangement.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Emergency powers tariffs invalidation prompts presidential denunciation of justices and raises separation of powers and institutional independence debate.
Six justices invalidated presidential global tariffs imposed under an asserted emergency powers statute, framing the central legal question as the permissible scope of executive authority to impose trade restrictions without clear congressional authorization, and the litigation tested statutory delegation, administrative action in the trade context, and judicial review of national-security framed economic measures.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Emergency power limits prompt alternative executive tariff action, raising concerns about agriculture costs and trade uncertainty.
The Supreme Court invalidated a presidential tariff framework as an unlawful exercise of emergency power, leading the president to announce use of alternative executive authority to impose a temporary global tariff. Stakeholders warned that further tariff actions or use of other authorities would increase agricultural input costs and create trade uncertainty, while business groups said ties with trade partners remain intact despite the disruption.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Presidential emergency powers curtailed as court invalidates broad tariffs imposed under IEEPA, overturning central global levies.
The Supreme Court found the President exceeded authority under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act by using IEEPA to impose broad tariffs, invalidating core IEEPA-based measures including the Liberation Day global tariff framework and subsequent trafficking and country-specific levies on Canada, Mexico, China, Brazil and India; sectoral and non-IEEPA tariffs remain in place while the executive considers alternative measures.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Executive emergency tariff authority limited, prompting administration to pursue alternative statutory bases for imposing tariffs.
The Supreme Court concluded that the Constitution vests the taxing power in Congress and that the emergency statute invoked by the Executive does not authorize imposition of tariffs as revenue measures, constraining executive emergency tariff authority; the administration plans to rely on alternative statutory bases to replace the invalidated tariffs.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Tariff policy remains central as the India trade arrangement continues despite judicial limits on tariff authority.
President Trump stated the bilateral trade arrangement with India remains in effect after the Supreme Court invalidated his broad tariffs, noting an Executive Order rescinded punitive tariffs on Indian oil imports from Russia and an Interim Agreement framework reduces reciprocal U.S. tariff treatment toward India while maintaining tariffs on Indian imports under the new terms; he framed tariffs as leverage for energy-sourcing commitments and de-escalation between India and Pakistan.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
IEEPA authority rejected, limiting tariff powers while administration decries the decision and cites geopolitical effects.
The Supreme Court held that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize imposition of duties, constraining executive authority to impose tariffs under national emergencies; the President criticized the ruling and reiterated that tariffs were used as a foreign policy tool to end hostilities between India and Pakistan, a claim denied by India which attributes cessation to direct military talks.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Global tariff authority challenged after court invalidated emergency-use tariffs; president plans executive-order, time-limited alternative.
A judicial body invalidated a broad presidential program of global tariffs as an unlawful exercise of emergency power, eliminating the administration's primary emergency-based mechanism for imposing unilateral worldwide duties. The president announced intent to use an alternative statutory authority via executive order that would impose time-limited tariffs restricted to 150 days, signaling a shift to a different administrative vehicle for trade measures.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Emergency powers invalidation limits executive authority to impose unilateral tariffs, nullifying sweeping reciprocal import duties.
The executive's imposition of sweeping "reciprocal" import duties under a claimed emergency powers statute was found unlawful; the tariffs were invalidated because setting import duties required clear congressional authorization rather than unilateral emergency proclamations, signaling a legal limit on executive authority to alter statutory tariff schemes by emergency declaration.
February 21, 2026
Show AI Summary
Judicial review of emergency tariff powers restores congressional tariff authority, affecting recently announced India-US trade concessions.
The US Supreme Court struck down President Trump's global tariffs imposed under emergency powers, finding tariff authority lies with Congress, thereby removing the legal basis for those sweeping reciprocal tariffs. Indian opposition leaders contend that a recently announced India-US trade framework contained concessions extracted while the tariffs were assumed valid, and they seek clarity on whether those commitments-covering tariff eliminations, import targets, energy sourcing, and non tariff barrier commitments-will persist or be revisited following the judgment.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
IEEPA authority invalidated - certain IEEPA based tariffs now refundable to importers who directly paid them.
IEEPA based tariffs were deemed impermissible, allowing refunds only to US importers of record or consignees who directly paid tariffs. Eligible tariffs include IEEPA imposed levies commonly termed fentanyl, trafficking, reciprocal or baseline tariffs, including certain tariffs on goods from Brazil and India. Refunds exclude duties imposed under other statutory authorities such as anti dumping, countervailing, trade remedy or national security provisions. The administrative procedure and timing for claims remain uncertain pending further court and executive guidance.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
Presidential emergency powers limited: IEEPA cannot be used to impose broad import tariffs, leaving refund questions open.
The Supreme Court concluded that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the president to impose broad import tariffs, stressing that authority to levy taxes and tariffs rests with Congress and that longstanding practice shows such power has not been exercised under IEEPA. The opinion invalidates tariffs enacted under emergency proclamations while leaving untouched tariffs based on other statutory grounds, and it leaves unresolved whether and how refunds should be returned to importers who paid the challenged levies.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
Presidential emergency tariff power invalidated, forcing alternative legal routes and prolonging trade and political uncertainty.
The Court held the president lacked authority to declare an economic emergency and impose sweeping import tariffs, removing an executive legal basis for those tariffs and forcing the administration to pursue alternative statutory mechanisms, which will prolong legal and political debate over trade policy.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
IEEPA authority curtailed: major emergency based tariffs invalidated, leaving sectoral trade measures and exemptions intact.
The President exceeded statutory authority by invoking IEEPA to impose broad import tariffs, nullifying core emergency based levies. Affected measures include the wide ranging "Liberation Day" tariffs, trafficking justified duties on Canada, Mexico and China, Brazil linked duties, and India related levies tied to Russian oil purchases. The decision removes the IEEPA route for economy wide tariffs but leaves intact sectoral and statute specific tools that continue to impose tariffs on selected industries and products.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
IEEPA authority struck down; partners unlikely to abandon recent tariff deals, administration to rely on other statutes.
The Supreme Court invalidated reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose broad tariffs, finding IEEPA does not authorize such duties. Observers anticipate the Administration will instead invoke clear congressional tariff statutes and that trading partners who made recent deals are unlikely to withdraw them, having expected alternative statutory mechanisms to keep tariffs in place.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
Emergency-powers tariff invalidation restores trade predictability for exporters, but sectoral steel and aluminium duties remain in force.
The US Supreme Court invalidated country-specific reciprocal tariffs imposed under emergency powers, restoring predictability for exporters and enabling importers to seek refunds for duties paid under the invalidated regime, while separate sector-specific duties on steel, aluminium and certain auto components remain in force.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
Tariff authority options: multiple statutory pathways remain for imposing import duties despite limits on emergency powers.
After the court rejected the administration's emergency-based authority for sweeping reciprocal tariffs, the president can still impose import duties using alternative statutes: the Trade Act unfair-practices authority permitting unlimited tariffs after investigation and hearings; the Trade Act provision for addressing unbalanced trade that allows time-limited tariffs without prior investigation but is untested; the national-security tariff authority under the Trade Expansion Act which requires Commerce investigations; and a rarely used Tariff Act depression-era authorisation that allows very high, indefinite tariffs without investigation.
February 20, 2026
Show AI Summary
IEEPA authority questioned as tariffs ruled unauthorized; dissent stresses tariffs' foreign affairs leverage, including India example.
The decision holds that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act does not authorize the imposition of import duties, rejecting the use of IEEPA as a statutory basis for tariffs; a dissent argued such tariffs fall within foreign affairs practice, serve as leverage in international negotiations, and cautioned against applying a major questions constraint to executive statutory authority in national security and diplomatic contexts.

News

Back

All News

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

News

Showing Results for : Reset Filters

Every violation of RBI fraud rules not open to court scrutiny: HC on lifting Anil Ambani case stay

February 24, 2026

Contents
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Mumbai, Feb 24 (PTI) The RBI's Master Directions aim to identify frauds and unscrupulous borrowers for timely action, and every violation of the same is not subject to judicial scrutiny, the Bombay High Court has said while lifting the stay on action by three banks to classify industrialist Anil Ambani's accounts as fraud.

A bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad on Monday quashed a single bench order of December 2025, which stayed the action initiated by three public sector banks based on the Master Directions issued by the RBI to classify Ambani's and Reliance Communications Ltd's bank accounts as fraud.

The court allowed appeals filed by the three public sector banks and the auditor firm BDO India LLP against the December 2025 interim order passed by a single bench of the HC.

The division bench held the single bench order as "perverse and illegal" and in breach of natural justice and said it suffers from "procedural irregularity and impropriety".

The court in its judgment, which was made available on Tuesday, said the Master Directions issued by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) cannot be interpreted in a different manner so as to cause prejudice to the lender banks and harm their interest.

It added that the issue was of public importance and concerned the financial system in the country and hence grant of an interim stay in such a matter was "patently illegal".

Based on the facts of the case, it is not difficult to arrive at a conclusion that "no irreparable injury" would be caused to Ambani if the proceedings against him are continued, the judgment noted.

"There is no prima facie reason to grant an interim injunction in favour of the respondent (Ambani). There are criminal investigations going on which shall be directly affected by the order of injunction granted by the court," HC said.

The court also criticised the single bench order for its "contradictory findings" and said that it was based on "flawed assumptions of fact and law".

The single bench completely misunderstood the primary object behind the Master Directions issued by the RBI, the judgment said, adding the same were issued in the interest of Banking Policy.

"These Master Directions are intended at securing public money and to provide a framework for early detection of frauds and recovery of public money through timely identification, control, reporting and mitigation of fraud risk," HC said.

These directions provide guidelines to the banks and financial institutions for effective investigation and reporting of fraud cases to appropriate regulatory and law enforcement authorities, it added.

Through these directions, the RBI disseminates information to the banks on details of frauds and unscrupulous borrowers so that timely action can be taken and the banks' interests are protected, the court noted.

"These directions cannot be interpreted in a different manner so as to cause prejudice to the lender banks and harm their interest. Every violation of the Master Directions shall not be amenable to judicial scrutiny," it said.

The bench also noted that the banks were entitled to engage an external auditor, including a forensic expert or an internal team for investigation and said the forensic report of BDO LLP was prepared by external auditors who are also forensic experts.

The Master Directions of 2016 do not contemplate a mandatory forensic report before the banks take a final decision, HC said.

The court also noted that the single judge's finding that the report submitted by BDO LLP does not prima facie appear to be a forensic report is clearly "perverse and liable to be set aside".

BDO LLP is an accounting consultancy firm, which is empanelled by the Indian Banks Association and also the SEBI for conducting a forensic audit, the judgment said.

The court agreed with the arguments of the banks that the single judge's order undermines public confidence in the banking system.

On Monday, Ambani's counsels sought the HC to stay its order so that they could approach the Supreme Court, but the request was declined.

The earlier single bench order had stayed all present and future action by Indian Overseas Bank, IDBI Bank and Bank of Baroda, noting that the action was based on a legally flawed forensic audit and violated the RBI's mandatory guidelines.

The three banks in their appeal said the forensic audit, which led to accounts being classified as "fraud", was legally valid and based on serious findings of fund siphoning and misutilisation.

Ambani had challenged before the single bench show-cause notices issued by the three banks, seeking to declare his and Reliance Communications' accounts as fraud accounts.

As an interim relief, he sought a stay of the notices and an injunction against any coercive action on the ground that BDO LLP was not qualified to conduct the forensic audit as its signatory was not a chartered accountant.

BDO LLP was an accounting consultant firm and not an audit firm, Ambani claimed.

The single bench had agreed with Ambani and stayed the action by the banks. PTI SP GK

Topics

Acts Income Tax