<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed?type=Highlights" rel="self" type="text/xml" />
        <title>Tax Updates - Daily Update</title>
        <link>https://www.taxtmi.com</link>
        <description>One stop solution for Direct Taxes and Indirect Taxes and Corporate Laws in India</description>
        <category>Business/Tax/Law/GST/India/Taxation/Policies/Legal/Corporate Tax/Personal Tax/Vat Law/Legal Information/Tax Information/Legal Services/Tax Services</category>
        <copyright>TaxTMI.Com / MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd. All rights reserved.</copyright>
        <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:31:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
        <language>en-us</language>
        <webMaster>webmaster@taxtmi.com</webMaster>
        <managingEditor>editor@taxtmi.com</managingEditor>
        <ttl>60</ttl>
        <item>
<title>Retrospective GST registration cancellation does not bar audit of historical compliance records, while concealment defeats discretionary writ relief.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105670</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105670</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[GST audit jurisdiction extends to records, returns, input tax credits, refunds and compliance during a period when registration existed, even if registration is later cancelled retrospectively. Retrospective cancellation does not erase the historical fact of registration or place underlying conduct beyond audit; audit authority arises from the statutory audit definition, audit provision and prescribed procedure, rather than the cancellation provision. Audit does not validate returns treated as void or determine tax liability, which remains subject to applicable statutory mechanisms. Material non-disclosure of a pending audit notice in earlier writ proceedings seeking retrospective cancellation can independently bar discretionary writ relief. The writ petition was dismissed, the audit notice remained effective for its stated period, and interim protection was vacated.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105670.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105670.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Further investigation alone cannot justify continued custody where the triple test supports conditional regular bail in tax-fraud allegations.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105669</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105669</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Further investigation after expiry of the statutory period, without any remaining recovery or discovery, does not by itself support continued custody in alleged fraudulent input tax credit matters. Where the offence carries a limited maximum sentence and is triable by a Magistrate, risks of interference with evidence, witnesses, or investigation should be assessed under the triple test and addressed through bail conditions. Continued incarceration pending a potentially lengthy trial may amount to pre-trial punishment, contrary to the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. Conditions may require cooperation with investigation, attendance at trial, and non-tampering with evidence or witnesses.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105669.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105669.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Alternative statutory remedy governs GST hearing-notice disputes where alleged procedural defects require examination of disputed records on appeal.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105668</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105668</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Availability of an efficacious statutory appeal ordinarily restrains writ jurisdiction over GST demands, even where breach of natural justice is alleged. Claims of non-service of personal-hearing notices, inadequate virtual-hearing opportunity, or failure to consider explanations do not automatically displace the appellate remedy. Where resolution depends on disputed records concerning registered email addresses, dispatch and communication of notices, hearing particulars, and submitted explanations, the appellate authority is the appropriate forum to examine them. The taxpayer may pursue the statutory appeal with all procedural and merits contentions left open.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105668.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105668.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Input tax credit reversal on common inputs requires verification, while annual-return discrepancies require examination before tax determination.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105667</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105667</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Section 17(2) requires input tax credit reversal only to the extent credit on common goods or services supports both taxable and exempt supplies; no reversal arises for wholly exempt traded cattle feed where no credit was availed on its purchase. GSTR-9 may correct figures reported in periodic returns, but a difference between GSTR-1 and GSTR-9 attributed to clerical error requires verification. Credit availability, any reversal, and resulting tax liability require determination after examining records and the reconciliation explanation with an opportunity of hearing.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105667.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105667.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>E-way Bill Values Alone Cannot Establish Job Worker Taxable Turnover Without Independent Evidence of Taxable Supply</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105666</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105666</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[E-way bill values in job work movements cannot, without independent evidence, be treated as a job worker's taxable turnover. E-way bills record goods movement, and their generation by a person involved in the transaction is not determinative where consignor and consignee particulars are correctly declared. Goods sent by a principal for processing and returned thereafter do not establish a taxable supply by the job worker, who paid tax on job work charges. A mismatch between e-way bill data and GST returns, absent proof of supply or tax evasion, could not sustain the demand. The Tribunal therefore set aside the demand, interest and penalty.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105666.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105666.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Form GSTR-1 rectification permits correction of B2B supplies wrongly reported as B2C without duplicating tax liability.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105665</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105665</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Form GSTR-1 rectification permits correction of B2B supplies mistakenly reported as B2C where invoices and outward-supply statements identify registered recipients. Re-reporting those supplies with March 2020 supplies can duplicate outward supplies, artificially inflate turnover and tax liability, and create an apparent short payment despite tax having been discharged through the corresponding Form GSTR-3B returns. Section 39(9) permits rectification within its outer time limit where the error did not arise from departmental scrutiny, audit, inspection, or enforcement activity; it does not require errors from a financial year to be corrected only in a succeeding financial year. The inflated GSTR-1-based demand was therefore quashed.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105665.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105665.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Fake-invoice penalties remain available where taxpayer admissions and records establish unsupported input tax credit claims and false GST documentation.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105664</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105664</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Board circulars cannot curtail statutory penalties applicable to fake-invoice transactions. False GST records, invoices issued without actual supply, contradictory admissions, cancelled registrations, and vehicle details inconsistent with goods transport may support penalties for creating fake documents and furnishing false returns with intent to evade tax. A taxpayer's statement under statutory summons may be relied upon without corroboration where it was not obtained by duress or coercion. Taxpayers claiming input tax credit must prove actual receipt of goods and suppliers' tax payment; additional documents cannot be relied on at the appellate stage without compliance with Rule 112. Penalties for unsupported input tax credit and false documents were restored, with bank-balance appropriation and attachment maintained.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105664.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105664.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Tax collected but not remitted attracts Section 76 liability, while delayed GSTR-3B credit remains time-barred.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105663</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105663</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Section 76 requires every person collecting an amount as tax to remit it to the Government, irrespective of registered status, composition scheme, exempt supplies, or the passing of input tax credit. Tax invoices and bank records evidencing consideration inclusive of tax establish actual collection for this purpose. Input tax credit is available only within statutory time limits; GSTR-3B returns filed after the prescribed deadline cannot validly be used to utilise time-barred credit. Debits through the electronic credit ledger for such credit are irregular and liable to disallowance, with consequential tax demand, interest, and equivalent penalty.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105663.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105663.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Portal Downtime Delaying E-Invoice Generation Cannot Support Detention Penalty Where Transport Documents Fully Disclose the Consignment.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105662</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105662</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Portal downtime preventing IRN generation at dispatch did not justify a goods-detention penalty where the commercial invoice, e-way bill and delivery note accurately disclosed the goods, value and tax particulars, and the IRN was generated later. Transportation under a delivery note operated as a safeguard where an invoice could not be issued on removal. Section 129 was treated as addressing clandestine movement and deliberate non-disclosure, not a technical reporting lapse without intent to evade tax; the penalty was therefore set aside. Payment through DRC-03 to secure release of detained goods and vehicle, made under economic duress, did not estop a substantive challenge. The amount paid was refundable with statutory interest after verification.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105662.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105662.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Transit-document compliance: post-detention invoices cannot validate garment movement, leaving the transporter exposed to owner-independent penalties.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105661</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105661</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Mandatory transit-documentation rules require invoices and e-way bills that correspond to goods physically carried at the time of movement. Invoices supplied only after detention, particularly without matching e-way bills, do not cure a movement unsupported by compliant records. Where no authentic, pre-existing ownership records identify the goods at interception, the transporter may be treated as a person other than the owner for penalty purposes. Undocumented garments may be valued using product quality, fabric specifications and prevailing wholesale-market averages where matching invoices are unavailable and buyers cannot be traced; such valuation must rest on objective and rational market indicators.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105661.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105661.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Physical verification overrides discrepant GST transport documents where cumulative evidence demonstrates intention to evade tax.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105660</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105660</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[GST detention penalties can be sustained where invoices, e-way bills and transport documents do not correspond with goods physically verified in transit. Documentary existence alone does not establish coverage of the transported goods; supplier-wise and aggregate weight discrepancies require reconciliation with contemporaneous electronic and transport records. Unsupported challenges to weighment, including those lacking timely objection, independent reweighment or technical evidence, do not negate such discrepancies. Cancellation and regeneration of e-way bills for the same invoice also require explanation. Cumulative material discrepancies established intention to evade tax, resulting in restoration of the original tax and penalty order.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105660.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105660.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Works contract classification applies to permanently installed fire-protection systems, while earthwork and obsolete IGST concessions remain unavailable.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105659</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105659</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Supply, erection, testing and commissioning of fire-protection equipment constitute a composite supply where naturally bundled. Once permanently installed and not removable without substantial dismantling, the system is immovable property; transfer of goods with its installation constitutes a works contract, treated as a supply of services under Heading 9954. Excavation and backfilling do not qualify the contract for the predominantly earthwork rate where earthwork is not predominant. Classification or concessional IGST treatment under omitted entries or a rescinded notification is unavailable.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105659.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105659.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Professional fee recovery for GST refund representation succeeds where direct engagement, fee acknowledgement, and authority are established despite contingency claims.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105658</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105658</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Recovery of professional fees for GST refund representation depended on proof of direct engagement, authority and acknowledgement of the agreed fee. A power of attorney, appearances before the GST authority and correspondence established the representative's authority and the company's fee obligation. The claimed condition that fees became payable only on receipt of the refund lacked contractual support, and non-joinder of chartered accountants did not defeat the claim. The agreed fee was recoverable, with pendente lite and future interest fixed at 6% per annum from suit filing until realisation.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105658.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105658.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Foreign sales commission earned abroad escapes Indian tax withholding where agents lack Indian business connection or establishment.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105657</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105657</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Foreign sales commission paid to non-resident agents for services performed entirely outside India is not chargeable to tax in India where the agents undertake no activity in India, maintain no business connection or establishment there, and receive the commission abroad. As tax deduction at source applies only to income chargeable in India, remittances in those circumstances do not attract withholding. Chartered Accountant certificates and supporting records may establish the absence of an Indian income nexus or establishment.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105657.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105657.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Search assessment additions require seized incriminating material, while unexplained land advances demand proof of payer identity and source.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105656</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105656</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Consequential assessments made under a subsisting revision order are tested against that order's directions and the action taken to implement them; an alleged defect in the original assessment alone does not invalidate the consequential assessment. For unabated search assessments, additions require incriminating material, which may comprise seized accounting data and corroborative statements rather than only the warrant or panchanama. Cash land advances remain unexplained credits where taxpayers do not establish payer identity, source, confirmations, or underlying transaction records; book entries and audited disclosures are insufficient against seized evidence of unaccounted cash. Telescoping against income offered by another group entity requires a proven factual nexus and assurance against double relief.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105656.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105656.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Tax deductions and transfer pricing: RD, CSR, offshore purchases and captive transfers governed by statutory conditions.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105655</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105655</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Tax deductions and transfer-pricing treatment turn on statutory conditions rather than administrative quantification or unsupported adjustments. Expenditure incurred at an approved in-house RD facility qualified for weighted deduction despite incomplete Form 3CL quantification; delegated rules could not restrict the statutory measure of eligible expenditure. For exempt-income disallowance, objective satisfaction from the accounts is required before applying Rule 8D, and interest-free funds exceeding investments preclude interest disallowance. Pre-amendment CSR expenditure remained deductible, whereas CSR spending subject to the later statutory Explanation was not deductible as business expenditure, although eligible donations could qualify.....]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105655.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105655.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Business deduction and tax computation rules distinguish delayed-TDS interest, exempt-income expenses, book profits and project supervision costs.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105654</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105654</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Interest paid for delayed remittance of TDS is not expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively for business under section 37(1), notwithstanding its compensatory character. A compulsory-acquisition capital-gains exemption requires examination of acquisition documents, compensation and statutory conditions, rather than rejection solely because it was omitted from the return. Transfer-pricing applicability and arm's length pricing of captive-power supplies require separate analysis. Section 14A and Rule 8D disallowance depends on the expenditure actually considered and cannot be resolved merely through the own-funds presumption. Project-monitoring and supervision costs may remain revenue expenditure despite capitalisation in accounts. Book-profit adjustments under section 115JB must be independently calculated without importing Rule 8D.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105654.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105654.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Pre-conversion CCD coupon pricing: compulsory conversion alone cannot justify a nil arm's-length price, so adjustment was deleted.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105653</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105653</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Compulsory conversion of debentures and the absence of cash redemption may affect comparable selection or adjustments, but do not by themselves justify treating an express pre-conversion coupon as having a nil arm's-length price. Recharacterisation requires facts showing that economic substance differs from legal form, or that reliable pricing is unavailable; no uncontrolled transaction supported a nil return under the Other Method. The nil-ALP adjustment was deleted, without establishing any universal arm's-length coupon rate. The related interest disallowance was also set aside for lack of an independent finding on business nexus or use of funds. Interest-limitation and statutory-interest computations require consequential verification, recomputation, and identification of the charging provision.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105653.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105653.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Transfer pricing of intra-group support services requires prescribed benchmarking; unsupported nil valuation and alternate business-expense disallowance fail.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105652</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105652</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Arm's length pricing for intra-group support services cannot be fixed at nil merely because adequate benefit from the expenditure is not established. Where existing benchmarking is rejected, the price must be determined through the most appropriate prescribed method and objective comparables; agreements, invoices, allocation workings and personnel material require cumulative assessment. Closely linked transactions benchmarked under TNMM cannot be selectively separated without proper basis. Evidence of actual operational support and business nexus supports deduction where no capital, personal or prohibited purpose is shown. The transfer-pricing adjustment and alternate disallowance were deleted. Interest under section 234C must be computed on tax due on returned income and recomputed accordingly.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105652.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105652.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Leasehold land premiums remain capital expenditure, while resident enterprises must include overseas branch profits in Indian taxable income.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105651</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105651</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Lump-sum lease premium paid to acquire leasehold land is capital expenditure, not a deductible revenue expense. Leasehold rights in land do not qualify as intangible assets or similar business or commercial rights eligible for depreciation; consequently, neither amortisation of the premium nor depreciation on those rights is available. For a resident Indian enterprise, overseas branch profits remain includible in Indian taxable income where applicable DTAAs use the expression "may be taxed"; the relevant clarification is not restricted to non-business income. Worldwide income must be computed under the Income-tax Act, with credit available for taxes paid in the source jurisdiction under the applicable provisions.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105651.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105651.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Revisionary jurisdiction requires demonstrable error and revenue prejudice; ESOP deductions and MAT adjustments need independent legal assessment.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105650</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105650</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Revisionary jurisdiction requires an assessment to be both erroneous and prejudicial to Revenue; a possible need for further enquiry, without identifying an indispensable omitted enquiry, an untenable assessment view, and resulting prejudice, is insufficient. Employee stock-option discounts, including liability crystallising on scheme modification, constitute employee-remuneration expenditure rather than capital or share-premium shortfall. A revision cannot rely on a ground absent from the show-cause notice. MAT book-profit adjustment for exempt-income expenditure requires independent identification of book-debited expenditure and cannot mechanically adopt Rule 8D. Deemed dividend requires legal shareholder membership in the recipient conce.....]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105650.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105650.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Surcharge computation for private discretionary trusts follows the applicable income-tax slab when maximum marginal rates apply.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105649</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105649</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[For a private discretionary trust taxable at the maximum marginal rate, surcharge on income-tax payable must be calculated by reference to the applicable slab rate. This requires recomputation of surcharge liability using the relevant income-tax slab rather than a calculation detached from that rate structure. The computation principle applies where the trust's status as a private discretionary trust subject to the maximum marginal rate is undisputed.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105649.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105649.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Mistake apparent from record permits correction of tax-free bond interest wrongly offered as taxable income, with refund consequences.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105648</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105648</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Erroneous inclusion of interest on tax-free bonds as taxable income was treated as a mistake apparent from the record, rather than a fresh claim requiring a revised return. Interest specifically exempt under section 10(15)(iv)(h) could not be taxed merely because it had been mistakenly offered as taxable income in the return. The Tribunal directed that interest on IIFCL and REC tax-free bonds be treated as exempt, with consequential refund and admissible interest.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105648.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105648.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Transfer-pricing comparability requires functional alignment, consistent filters, and transaction-specific adjustments, while debt-free delayed receivables may not attract interest.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105647</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105647</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Transfer-pricing comparability is determined by the real operational character of margin items, functional and risk profiles, consistently applied persistent-loss and aggregate related-party transaction filters, and economic circumstances such as turnover and extraordinary events. Under TNMM, working-capital differences require analysis based on average receivables, payables and inventory; delayed associated-enterprise receivables do not warrant notional interest where a debt-free enterprise bears no interest cost and no financing benefit is established. Medical-product distribution may be benchmarked under the Resale Price Method using comparable gross margins, while adjustments must be limited to associated-enterprise international transa.....]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105647.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105647.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Borrowed satisfaction invalidates reassessment when alleged escaped income differs from the share loss ultimately disallowed.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105646</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105646</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Reassessment based on third-party information was invalid where the recorded reasons alleged escaped income but the assessment disallowed a materially different penny-stock share-sale loss, demonstrating no independent application of mind and borrowed satisfaction. A claimed short-term capital loss on sale of shares remained allowable where contract notes, banking and broker records, demat records, and investment-account entries evidenced exchange-traded transactions through a registered broker, and no defect in that evidence was identified; general penny-stock allegations were insufficient. The Revenue's challenge to deletion of the loss disallowance was dismissed, while proceedings for another assessment year were remitted for fresh adjudication.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105646.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105646.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Benami transaction proof through funding capacity, bank records and beneficial ownership evidence sustained attachment of agricultural land.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105645</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105645</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Benami status of agricultural land transactions was established through evidence that the ostensible holder lacked financial capacity, bank records did not support funding for the purchases or later transfers, and an initial sworn statement identified the beneficial owners. Subsequent transfers to family members of the beneficial owners and an unexplained reduction in stated consideration corroborated that statement; an unsupported retraction did not displace it. Restrictions on transfer of Scheduled Caste land to persons of other categories formed part of the surrounding circumstances. The properties remained subject to confirmed provisional attachment, and the challenges failed.]]></description>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105645.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105645.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Benami transaction proof requires a demonstrated nexus between consideration, alleged funding source, and intended beneficial ownership or allegations fail.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105644</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105644</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Provisional attachment of movable property under the benami regime requires compliance with the statutory route: attachment under section 24(4)(a)(i) is confined to property already provisionally attached under section 24(3), while other property requires section 24(4)(b)(i). An incorrect or omitted reference to the applicable benami category in a show-cause notice does not invalidate proceedings where the stated facts disclose an applicable category. Material from income-tax proceedings may be relied upon. Establishing benami ownership nevertheless requires proof that the alleged beneficial owner paid the consideration and would receive future benefit; a temporal and evidential gap between alleged funding and acquisition fails that burden.]]></description>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105644.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105644.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Extended limitation failed where preferential-duty imports were cleared after examination without importer knowledge of certificate defects.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105643</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105643</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Extended limitation for recovery of customs duty was not invocable where imports received preferential treatment after examination, the certificate verification was not undertaken within the prescribed period, and no evidence showed the importer's knowledge of defects, collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts. The recovery notice was consequently time-barred. A Malaysian Certificate of Origin could not be rejected on an alert concerning different goods or on undisclosed emails not included in the notice or supplied to the importer; exemption denial and confiscation were therefore unsustainable. Redemption fine was also not imposable because the cleared goods were unavailable.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105643.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105643.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Regional value content certification supports AIFTA tariff treatment for imported silver jewellery absent evidence challenging a genuine origin certificate.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105642</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105642</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[AIFTA preferential tariff treatment for imported silver bangle jewellery is available where a genuine Thai Certificate of Origin certifies origin and Regional Value Content, unless contrary certification is displaced by corroborative evidence. DGFT wastage limits applicable to Indian silver-jewellery manufacturers cannot be applied to a foreign manufacturer. Assumptions, presumptions, or Indian wastage standards cannot justify denial of the preferential tariff. The resulting value enhancement, differential-duty demand, confiscation, redemption fine, and penalties are unsustainable, with consequential relief following.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105642.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105642.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Service of Adjudication Orders Governs Customs Appeal Limitation and Uncorroborated Claims Cannot Support Gold Confiscation</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105641</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105641</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Limitation for a customs appeal runs from proven service of the adjudication order; where Revenue cannot establish earlier service and the appellant files within the statutory period after receiving an RTI copy, dismissal as time-barred is erroneous. For unmarked gold carried openly by a domestic passenger, Revenue must establish foreign origin before the burden under Section 123 arises. A retracted statement without independent corroboration, absent foreign markings and without characteristics of standard foreign gold, does not meet that burden. Domestic travel creates no international baggage-declaration obligation. Confiscation and penalty under Sections 111(l) and 111(m) were therefore set aside, with consequential relief.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105641.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105641.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Statutory pre-deposit defects are curable, while Special Additional Duty recovery fails after foundational orders are reversed.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105640</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105640</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Statutory pre-deposit in a customs appeal is a curable defect where the appeal is filed within limitation; the bar applies to entertaining the appeal on merits, not to its presentation. Dismissal without notifying the deficiency and providing a hearing is unsustainable, although separate pre-deposit requirements apply at each appellate stage. Recovery proceedings for alleged erroneous Special Additional Duty refunds may be initiated while review or departmental appeals are pending, but recovery founded solely on appellate orders cannot survive once those orders are set aside or recalled and refund entitlement attains finality. Remand is unnecessary where it would merely implement binding final orders; the dismissal and consequential recovery demands were set aside.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105640.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105640.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Baggage Import Exclusion: Tribunal cannot hear confiscation and penalty appeals concerning gold articles carried by arriving passengers.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105639</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105639</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[The proviso to Section 129A excludes Tribunal jurisdiction over appeals from Commissioner (Appeals) orders relating to goods imported or exported as baggage. Baggage describes the mode and category of import, and goods retain that character regardless of whether they are dutiable, prohibited, confiscable, bona fide or non-bona fide. Gold articles carried into India by arriving passengers and dealt with as baggage therefore fall within the exclusion. Challenges to confiscation and penalties concerning such gold articles must be pursued through revision before the Revisional Authority under Section 129DD, rather than before the Tribunal.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105639.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105639.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>SFIO investigation orders require demonstrable relevant circumstances; FIR quashing on settlement does not bar scrutiny of distinct fund-diversion allegations.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105638</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105638</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[SFIO investigation orders made in the public interest must be founded on demonstrable, relevant circumstances. Judicial review examines whether the statutory decision-making process was flawed, rather than reassessing the adequacy or propriety of the underlying material. Detailed grounds need not be disclosed where disclosure could prejudice public interest or the investigation. Quashing of an FIR following settlement of homebuyer complaints does not resolve separate allegations of false loan documentation and diversion of company funds. The High Court found that the investigation order and its stated scope showed due consideration of those distinct allegations, sustained the order, and dismissed the writ application.]]></description>
<category>Corporate Laws</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105638.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105638.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Res judicata bars fresh share valuation challenges after compulsory buyout valuation attains finality in appellate proceedings.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105637</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105637</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Res judicata prevents reopening a compulsory share-buyout valuation once prior appellate proceedings have confirmed the valuation mechanism and report, following opportunities for submissions before the valuer and adjudicating authority. Liberty to seek further directions is confined to enforcing the earlier order and does not authorise a renewed valuation challenge. Merger principles associated with dismissal of a special-leave petition do not apply to this special statutory appellate jurisdiction. An application for rectification and fresh valuation is therefore not maintainable because it reopens a concluded issue and constitutes abuse of process; rejection of the application and dismissal of the appeal follow.]]></description>
<category>Corporate Laws</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105637.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105637.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>FERA penalty appeals remain criminal proceedings after repeal, with FEMA saving provisions preserving liabilities and appellate remedies.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105636</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105636</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[FERA liabilities, penalties and legal remedies remain preserved after repeal through FEMA's saving scheme, read with the General Clauses Act, so that prior contraventions continue to be dealt with as though FERA remained in force. The appellate route under FEMA does not recharacterise saved FERA penalty adjudications as civil revenue litigation. Appeals from FERA-based penalties are therefore maintainable in criminal appellate jurisdiction, and objections that they must proceed only on the Original Side do not apply.]]></description>
<category>FEMA</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105636.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105636.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>PMLA bail exception for women may apply where prolonged pre-trial custody continues and trial remains unlikely to conclude soon.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105635</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105635</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[The first proviso to Section 45(1) of the PMLA addresses an exception to the statutory twin bail conditions for women accused of money laundering. Relevant considerations include prolonged custody, setting aside of an earlier cognizance order, extensive material and witnesses, continuing investigations into scheduled offences, and whether the trial is likely to conclude soon. Where those circumstances indicate that timely completion of trial is unlikely, continued pre-trial incarceration warrants scrutiny when considering regular bail.]]></description>
<category>PMLA</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105635.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105635.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Disproportionate assets liability shifts the evidentiary burden to public servants once prosecution establishes substantial unexplained disparity.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105634</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105634</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Prosecution for possession of assets disproportionate to known lawful income requires proof of the public servant's known income, assets, pecuniary resources and expenditure during the relevant check period; it need not undertake a roving inquiry into undisclosed income. Once substantial disproportion is shown, the public servant must provide a satisfactory, credible and verifiable explanation because asset sources and acquisition are within that person's special knowledge. Unsupported challenges to asset valuation, household expenditure and claimed income did not rebut the established disproportion, so the conviction for criminal misconduct was affirmed.]]></description>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105634.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105634.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Zero-rated turnover follows the export invoice and removal period, while actual export remains mandatory for refund entitlement.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105633</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105633</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Rule 89(4) attributes the value of zero-rated goods to the refund period in which export invoices are issued and goods are removed under bond or LUT, rather than the later period of physical export. Sections 12 and 31 support invoice-and-removal recognition of supply, while actual export remains essential to establish export status and sustain the refund. Shipping bills and export records verify the later export event and must correlate with relevant invoices. Where export is delayed or does not occur within the stipulated period, Rule 96A governs extensions, tax and interest consequences; a mismatch in invoice and physical-export dates alone does not exclude the value from zero-rated turnover.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105633.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105633.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Reassessment objections require speaking disposal before scrutiny, barring inquiry notices until four weeks after service of rejection.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105632</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105632</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Under the pre-amendment Section 148 framework, an Assessing Officer must provide recorded reasons on request and dispose of reopening objections through a separate, reasoned speaking order before commencing merits scrutiny. A return filed in response to Section 148 is processed as a Section 139 return, but a Section 143(2) notice starts scrutiny and cannot precede disposal of jurisdictional objections. A Section 142(1) inquiry notice is likewise a merits-stage step. Following service of an adverse objection order, no further reassessment action may be taken for four weeks, preserving judicial-review rights. Breach may invalidate premature notices and consequential reassessment action.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105632.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105632.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Ineligible input tax credit alone does not establish suppression; enhanced consequences require proof of intent to evade tax.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105631</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105631</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Section 74 requires more than wrongful availment or utilisation of input tax credit: fraud, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts with intent to evade tax must be alleged and proved. Under the former Explanation 2, suppression covered failure to declare legally required information or failure to provide information sought in writing, but did not remove the intent requirement. Disclosures in returns, annual reconciliations and portal filings materially weaken a non-declaration allegation. Mere audit detection or non-response to audit communications does not independently establish suppression, particularly where the notice did not plead that basis. Section 74 proceedings and enhanced penalties therefore require evidence of deliberate concealment, and appellate review cannot sustain a demand on a materially new allegation beyond the show cause notice.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105631.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105631.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Inland container depot notification adds Anekollu for customs-authorised unloading of imports and loading of export goods.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105630</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105630</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Notification No. 12/97-Customs (N.T.) is amended to add Anekollu in Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu, to the listed Inland Container Depots. The newly inserted entry permits unloading of imported goods and loading of export goods, including any specified class of such goods, at that location. This extends notified customs handling facilities to Anekollu for import unloading and export loading operations.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105630.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105630.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Chapter XIX exclusion applies to payments received by the International Rice Research Institute, subject to specified privileges and immunities conditions.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105629</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105629</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Payments received by the International Rice Research Institute are excluded from the application of Chapter XIX of the Income-tax Act, 2025. The exclusion is subject to the conditions prescribed under the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947, read with the relevant Ministry of External Affairs notification. It takes effect from publication in the Official Gazette.]]></description>
<category>Income Tax</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105629.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105629.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Anti-dumping duty exemption for specified titanium dioxide end uses requires electronic declaration, with duty and interest recoverable for diversion.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105628</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105628</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Anti-dumping duty on titanium dioxide originating in or exported from China PR is confined to specified end uses. Titanium dioxide used in food, pharmaceutical, skin-care, textile and fibre applications, and nano or ultrafine material below 100 nm, is excluded. Importers claiming exclusion must make an electronic Bill of Entry declaration and undertake to pay applicable anti-dumping duty and interest if goods are supplied for non-excluded uses. Diversion or use contrary to the declared end use triggers recovery of anti-dumping duty, consequential differential duty and interest, without limiting further action under customs law. The prior implementation circular is superseded.]]></description>
<category>Customs</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105628.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105628.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Input tax credit requires independent, reasoned assessment; supplier tax default alone cannot mechanically determine purchaser liability.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105627</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105627</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Input tax credit claimed by a purchasing dealer cannot be determined mechanically solely because registered suppliers allegedly failed to deposit tax. The proper officer must independently assess the purchaser's liability under the applicable provision, consider documentary material supporting supplies, hear the parties, and issue a reasoned speaking order. Findings that the purchaser's material supported the supplies and that fraud was not established remain undisturbed, while the merits of the credit claim remain open for lawful determination.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105627.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105627.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Regular bail in fraudulent input tax credit allegations: continued investigation cannot justify prolonged pre-trial custody.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105626</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105626</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Regular bail in alleged fraudulent input tax credit claims may be granted despite continuing further investigation where no recovery or discovery remains, offences carry a limited maximum sentence, and are triable by a Magistrate. Expiry of the statutory period and proposed witness examinations alone do not warrant indefinite custody. Risks of evidence tampering or evasion can be managed through conditions under the triple test. Prolonged detention pending a trial likely to take time constitutes pre-trial punishment and conflicts with the principle that bail is the rule and jail the exception. Bail was granted subject to conditions securing participation and protecting evidence.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105626.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105626.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Clean slate principle does not extinguish GST liabilities when a corporate debtor is sold as a going concern.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105625</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105625</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Clean slate principle does not extinguish GST liabilities when a corporate debtor is sold as a going concern in liquidation. Such a sale transfers identified assets and liabilities as a single package, preserves the corporate identity, and requires the purchaser or new management to assume pre-existing, current and moratorium-period liabilities. The statutory priority for distribution of realised liquidation assets does not apply to a going-concern sale. GST demand proceedings require fresh adjudication where no effective reply was filed and transfer-of-business liability requires consideration, subject to a 25% deposit of disputed tax and a detailed reply.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105625.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105625.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Meaningful pre-decisional hearing is required before input tax credit blocking; inadequate notice invalidates Rule 86A action.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105624</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105624</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Rule 86A requires a meaningful pre-decisional opportunity before input tax credit is blocked. Where a claimant must produce records and substantiate the credit claim, a three-day notice is insufficient and reduces the hearing requirement to an empty formality. Administrative and quasi-judicial action must be right, just and fair, rather than arbitrary or oppressive; denial of fair hearing may render the action void from inception. The High Court quashed the blocking order and consequential actions, directed unblocking of the credit, and permitted fresh action only after an adequate opportunity to produce records and be heard.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105624.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105624.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Belated ITC-03 compliance requires fresh consideration of composition levy eligibility and may affect consequential GST tax proceedings.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105623</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105623</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Belated filing of Form ITC-03 requires consideration when determining a taxpayer's eligibility for the composition levy under Section 10 read with Rule 3. Denial based solely on non-filing, particularly where the taxpayer's reply was not considered, should be reassessed after taking subsequent compliance and the taxpayer's response into account. Acceptance of composition eligibility may affect consequential tax proceedings under Section 74, while collection and payment of composition tax may continue without prejudice to the tax authorities' rights.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105623.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105623.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>GST collected but not remitted attracts Section 76 penalty even where registered suppliers issued valid invoices.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105622</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105622</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Section 76(1) applies to every person who collects an amount as representing GST and does not pay it to the Government, without limiting its scope to unauthorised collections or unregistered persons. A registered supplier that collects GST through valid invoices but files nil or no returns and fails to remit the collection falls within the provision, regardless of whether the underlying supplies are taxable. The prescribed penalty equals the tax collected and not remitted. On that basis, the appellate deletion of penalty was reversed and the penalty restored.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105622.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105622.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
        <item>
<title>Input tax credit claims require documentary proof, while delayed supplier payment triggers reversal, interest and statutory minimum penalties.</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105621</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=105621</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2026 17:29:35 +0530</pubDate>
<description><![CDATA[Input tax credit eligibility rests on the claimant, who must substantiate invoices, supplier payment, transport or goods receipt, and supplier ledger evidence. Retrospective cancellation of a supplier's registration alone remains unresolved as a basis for denying credit. Where credit is inadmissible, consequential interest requires quantification by the proper officer. Failure to pay a supplier within 180 days requires reversal or addition of equivalent credit to output tax liability with interest; unavailable FORM GSTR-2 does not remove that liability, and later payment permits re-availment without extending the deadline. Statutory minimum penalties apply separately under Central and State enactments and aggregate under the integrated tax regime.]]></description>
<category>GST</category>
<category>Highlights</category>
<category>TaxLaws</category>
<category>TaxTMI</category>
<enclosure url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105621.jpg" type="image" />
<media:content url="https://www.taxtmi.com/file_folder/infographics/marquee_105621.jpg" medium="image" />
        </item>
<item>
<title>TMI Updates - Newsletter dated: November 01, 2026</title>
<link>https://www.taxtmi.com/newsletter?id=11/01/2026</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/newsletter?id=11/01/2026</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Newsletter for tax updates and legal information]]></description>
<category>Daily Updates</category>
<category>Tax</category>
        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>