Just a moment...

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 characters0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - 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
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
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.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    ManualsIncome Tax
    Can ICDS apply to a person following cash system of accounting and to the person whose books of acco...
    Switching from normal payment of tax composition scheme - Whether the assessee is liable to reverse ...
    Switching from composition scheme to normal scheme of payment of tax - Whether the assessee is eligi...
    Can a registered person, who purchases goods from a composition manufacturer / trader (dealer / supp...
    In case of a person who is/was availing composition scheme u/s 10. What will be the due date of paym...
    What is the due date of payment of Tax under GST? What is the due date for payment of tax (GST) and ...
    Whether a person who is opting for Composition u/s 10 of the GST, is required to pay GST at composit...
    A person who was making inter-state supplies during the previous year but not making inter-state sup...
    How to determine Turnover limit for availing the benefit of composition scheme? Is it required to be...
    What is the validity of composition levy? Whether intimation is required to be submitted each year f...
    Can the option to pay tax under composition levy be exercised at any time of the year?
    Can a person paying tax under composition levy, withdraw voluntarily from the scheme? If so, how?
    Can an Importer of goods or services opt to pay tax under composition scheme under GST?
    Can an exporter of goods opt to pay tax under composition scheme under GST?
    Can a person paying tax under composition scheme under GST make supplies of goods to SEZ?
    Whether a person having turnover much below ₹ 75 Lakhs (Rs. 50 lakhs as the case may be) as on...
    A person availing benefit of composition scheme under GST, want to be a casual dealer in another sta...
    Who are not eligible to opt for composition scheme? Whether certain manufacturers (like Ice cream, P...
    A person availing composition scheme during a financial year crosses the turnover of ₹ 75 Lakh...
    Whether a person supplying goods through Electronic Commerce Operator, is eligible to opt compositio...
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

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

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    ManualsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    ICDS applicability limited to mercantile accounting; excludes cash-accounting and individuals/HUFs not subject to tax audit.
    ICDS applies to persons following the mercantile system of accounting and does not apply to those following the cash system. For individuals and HUFs, ICDS is applicable only if they carry on business or profession and their books are required to be audited under the tax audit provisions; it does not apply where there is no business or professional income even if mercantile accounting is followed for other heads.
    ManualsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Reversal of Input Tax Credit on switching to composition scheme; capital goods credit prorated by remaining useful life.
    Switching to the composition scheme requires reversal of Input Tax Credit on inputs, inputs in semi finished or finished goods held in stock, and capital goods held in stock as on the day before the option is exercised, by payment from the electronic credit or cash ledger after prescribed reductions. For capital goods, reversal is prorated by remaining useful life using an assumed five year useful life, with the credit attributable to remaining months computed as original credit multiplied by remaining months divided by sixty.
    ManualsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit eligibility on switching from composition to normal scheme - capital goods credit reduced over time, subject to time bar.
    A taxpayer switching from the composition scheme to the normal scheme may claim Input Tax Credit for inputs, inputs in goods held in stock, and capital goods held immediately before liability to pay tax, but credit for capital goods must be reduced by the prescribed periodic reduction measured from the invoice or receipt date, and no credit may be claimed for supplies after one year from the tax invoice date.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit denial: purchases from composition taxpayers are ineligible for ITC under the GST regime.
    A composition scheme taxpayer is excluded from the input tax credit chain, cannot issue a tax invoice or collect tax, and must state that no credit is available. Consequently, a registered person purchasing from a composition dealer cannot claim Input Tax Credit because the supplier does not charge GST in a manner that would enable the recipient to treat the payment as tax paid for ITC purposes.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme threshold triggers monthly tax payment and monthly returns requirement for the affected taxpayer.
    A taxpayer under the Composition Scheme may pay and file on the quarterly schedule (guidance noting payment on the 18th and quarterly return on the 18th after quarter-end). If the taxpayer crosses the threshold or withdraws from composition, they become a regular taxable person and must pay tax and furnish returns monthly by the 20th of the following month for the remainder of the financial year and subsequent years.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST payment due date: monthly filers pay with next-month return; composition filers pay with quarterly return.
    Tax under GST must be paid not later than the return's due date. Monthly filers must file GSTR-3 and pay tax by the twentieth day of the month following the tax month. Composition taxpayers under the composition scheme file quarterly in GSTR-4 and must pay tax by the eighteenth day after the quarter ends.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition levy on exempt supplies raises eligibility ambiguity due to turnover inclusion versus ineligibility for non leviable supplies.
    The composition levy's tax base, as defined by turnover, expressly includes exempt supplies, indicating that composition tax is payable having regard to exempted goods; however, Section 10(2)(b) disqualifies persons making supplies "not leviable to tax," creating an ambiguity whether exempt supplies (which definitionally includes nil rated and wholly exempt supplies and non taxable supplies) render a person ineligible for composition. Commentators note this tension and call for clarification or amendment to reconcile the turnover inclusion with the eligibility restriction.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Eligibility for composition scheme may be barred by prior inter state supplies, even if current turnover is below threshold.
    A registered person who made inter state supplies during the previous year is ineligible to opt for the composition scheme in the current year, because eligibility under Section 10 is determined with reference to the preceding financial year; thus the absence of inter state supplies must be assessed for the previous year even if turnover remains below the threshold.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme eligibility: turnover in preceding financial year determines entitlement; aggregate turnover is all-India and fresh declaration required.
    Eligibility for the composition scheme depends on aggregate turnover in the preceding financial year not exceeding the prescribed threshold; aggregate turnover is computed on an all India basis and includes taxable supplies (excluding inward reverse charge supplies), exempt supplies, exports and inter State supplies by the same PAN, while excluding GST and cess. Eligibility is reassessed each year; a fresh declaration is required to opt into the scheme after becoming eligible.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme validity continues while statutory conditions are met; annual intimation is not required for eligible taxpayers.
    The composition levy remains valid so long as statutory eligibility conditions and applicable CGST Rules are complied with; no fresh annual intimation is required if those conditions continue to be met.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition levy option must be elected before the financial year begins; prior electronic intimation required.
    The option to pay tax under the composition levy must be exercised by giving electronic intimation in FORM GST CMP-02 prior to the commencement of the relevant financial year under the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition levy withdrawal: file FORM GST CMP-04 and submit FORM GST ITC-01 detailing stock within the prescribed period.
    Withdrawal from the composition scheme is effected by filing a duly signed or verified application in FORM GST CMP-04, and the applicant must electronically furnish FORM GST ITC-01 detailing stock of inputs and inputs contained in semi-finished or finished goods held on the date of withdrawal within thirty days of withdrawal.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme: importers may remain in composition though IGST on imports may not yield input tax credit, service providers excluded.
    Importers can opt for the composition scheme where otherwise eligible; there is no categorical bar on importers availing composition levy. IGST is payable on import and such tax may not yield input tax credit for a composition taxpayer. Pure service providers remain ineligible for composition, and importing services for business or captive consumption does not automatically make a person a service provider or disqualify composition eligibility.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme eligibility: exporters cannot use composition tax where their supplies are treated as inter State, barring such option.
    Exports are treated as inter State supplies for GST purposes. The composition levy prohibits a taxpayer from making inter State outward supplies of goods while paying tax under the composition scheme. Therefore, an exporter whose transactions are classified as inter State supplies cannot opt to pay tax under the composition scheme in respect of those export supplies.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme: suppliers cannot make inter State outward supplies to SEZ while remaining in the scheme.
    Supplies from the domestic tariff area to an SEZ are treated as inter State supplies, and Rule 5/Section 10 conditions for the composition levy prohibit a composition taxpayer from making inter State outward supplies; therefore a person paying tax under the composition scheme cannot make outward supplies of goods to an SEZ while remaining in the scheme.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme eligibility denied where stock on appointed day was purchased inter state, imported, or received from outside State.
    Persons below the turnover threshold who hold stock on the appointed day cannot opt for the composition scheme if that stock was purchased inter state, imported, or received from an out of State branch, agent or principal; possession of such goods on the appointed day disqualifies a registered person from the composition levy.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme eligibility barred for casual and non-resident taxable persons; cannot claim composition as casual dealer.
    A taxpayer acting as a casual taxable person or a non-resident taxable person is expressly excluded from the composition levy; therefore casual dealers and non-resident taxable persons cannot avail the composition scheme while operating in that capacity.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme ineligibility: manufacturers of ice cream, pan masala and tobacco and certain suppliers cannot opt.
    Section 10(2) excludes five categories from the composition scheme: suppliers of services (except restaurant services), suppliers of non taxable goods, inter State suppliers, persons supplying through electronic commerce operators, and manufacturers of notified goods. Rule 5 adds further ineligible classes. A notification further specifies that manufacturers of ice cream, pan masala, and all tobacco and manufactured tobacco substitutes are not eligible for composition levy.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme lapse triggers transition to regular tax liability and requires issuing tax invoices and filing withdrawal notice promptly.
    Crossing the aggregate turnover threshold causes the composition option to lapse from the day the threshold is exceeded; the person is liable to pay tax under section 9 from that day and must issue tax invoices for every taxable supply made thereafter. The person must also file an intimation for withdrawal from the scheme in FORM GST CMP-04 within seven days of the occurrence of such event.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composition scheme eligibility may be available for suppliers using e-commerce operators while TDS/TCS provisions remain inoperative.
    Eligibility for the composition scheme is negated for suppliers making supplies through an electronic commerce operator required to collect tax at source; however, because the TDS/TCS provisions are not yet operative and ECOs are not required to collect tax, suppliers using ECOs may currently opt for the composition scheme until the collection provisions are brought into force, and an administrative clarification from the government is recommended to remove uncertainty.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Resolution Plan Approvals: The Supreme Court's Clarification on NCLT and NCLAT's Jurisdiction in Insolvency Resolution.

      14 February, 2024

      Contents
      Plus +
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Deciphering Legal Judgments: A Comprehensive Analysis of Case Law

      Reported as:

      2023 (11) TMI 910 - Supreme Court

      Introduction: In a defining judgment, the Supreme Court of India elaborated on the jurisdictional boundaries of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) within the framework of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). This analysis ventures into the intricate details of the case, focusing on how and where the NCLT and NCLAT issued their orders, leading to a crucial legal discourse on the sanctity of the Committee of Creditors' (CoC) commercial wisdom and the precise extent of judicial review permissible under the IBC.

      Background: The core of the dispute emanated from a resolution plan submitted for the insolvency resolution of a company, which triggered a debate on the valuation of the company's assets and the commercial decisions made by the CoC. The NCLT, in its order dated 01.09.2021, and the NCLAT, through its judgment dated 19.01.2022, directed a revaluation of assets, raising significant questions about their jurisdiction and the scope of their authority to alter or influence the CoC's commercial decisions.

      Analysis of Issues:

      1. NCLT and NCLAT's Orders: The NCLT's directive for asset revaluation stemmed from an application for the approval of a resolution plan. The tribunal's order placed the resolution plan in abeyance, mandating a reassessment of the corporate debtor's asset value. The NCLAT upheld this directive, reinforcing the call for a detailed asset valuation, which became a pivotal issue leading to the Supreme Court's intervention.

      2. Jurisdictional Overreach: The crux of the Supreme Court's analysis centered on whether the NCLT and NCLAT had overstepped their jurisdiction by mandating asset revaluation. The Court scrutinized the extent of the tribunals' authority under the IBC, especially in relation to interfering with the CoC's commercial judgments.

      3. Commercial Wisdom of the CoC: A significant aspect of the discussion revolved around the principle that the commercial wisdom of the CoC is paramount and generally not amenable to judicial review. The Supreme Court emphasized that the IBC vests the CoC with the ultimate discretion to evaluate and approve resolution plans based on their assessment of the corporate debtor's value and the feasibility of the proposed resolution plan.

      Discussion and Findings:

      The Supreme Court's at the end of para 30 has noted that, "At the cost of repetition, nobody had moved before the NCLT or raised any objection challenging the Resolution Plan pending approval. Even the NCLAT has only indicated that when “figures of crores” are emerging stage-wise, “then there is no harm to look at the Expert opinion”, which the Adjudicating Authority-NCLT in this case has asked for".

      The Supreme Court's observation at the end of paragraph 30 underscores a critical aspect of judicial intervention in the corporate insolvency resolution process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). The Court noted that there had been no objections or challenges to the resolution plan pending approval before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) by any party. This absence of objections signifies the unchallenged acceptance of the resolution plan by the stakeholders involved, highlighting the autonomy and the commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in making decisions regarding the insolvency resolution.

      Furthermore, the Supreme Court's reference to the NCLAT's remark about considering expert opinions when "figures of crores" are involved underlines the prudence of seeking specialized expertise in complex financial assessments. However, the Court clarifies that such an approach does not inherently mandate revaluation or reassessment of assets as directed by the NCLT in this case. Instead, the emphasis is on the limited scope of judicial review concerning the commercial decisions taken by the CoC. The NCLT's request for revaluation, as indicated, was not rooted in any substantial objection raised during the approval process, which suggests an overreach of its adjudicatory role as envisioned under the IBC.

      The Supreme Court's observation highlights the principle that the adjudicatory authorities (NCLT and NCLAT) should refrain from interfering in the commercial wisdom of the CoC, especially in the absence of any objections or challenges to the resolution plan. This restraint is crucial to maintaining the sanctity of the CoC's decisions and ensuring a smooth and efficient insolvency resolution process, free from unnecessary judicial intervention. The observation underscores the importance of respecting the specialized knowledge and decisions of financial creditors in resolving corporate insolvency, while also recognizing the role of expert opinions in assisting the adjudication process when significant financial stakes are involved.

      Conclusion:

      The Supreme Court's decision to set aside the orders of the NCLT and NCLAT was rooted in a fundamental principle of the IBC: the limited scope of judicial intervention in the CoC's commercial decisions. The Court elucidated that the NCLT and NCLAT, by mandating a revaluation of assets, had unduly interfered with the commercial prerogatives of the CoC. This interference was deemed beyond their jurisdiction, highlighting a misapprehension of their role as adjudicating bodies under the IBC.

      This landmark judgment by the Supreme Court reasserts the autonomy of the CoC in the insolvency resolution process, delineating the boundaries of judicial review by the NCLT and NCLAT. By clarifying the jurisdictional limits of these tribunals, the Court has reinforced the IBC's intent to facilitate swift and efficient insolvency resolutions, ensuring that the commercial wisdom of the CoC remains supreme. The decision underscores the necessity of adhering to the statutory framework of the IBC, safeguarding the resolution process from unwarranted judicial overreach, and maintaining the balance between judicial oversight and commercial discretion.

       


      Full Text:

      2023 (11) TMI 910 - Supreme Court

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax