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
    Hierarchy of Income-tax Authorities in India : Clause 236 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 1...
    Exclusion from the Indian Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 234(4)-(7) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Anti-Abuse Safeguards in the Indian Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 234(1)-(3) of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Temporary Cessation and Qualifying Status under India's Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 232(22)-(23) of ...
    Continuity of Tonnage Tax Benefits in Shipping Sector Demergers : Clause 233(5)-(6) of Income Tax Bi...
    Continuity of Tonnage Tax Benefits in Shipping Amalgamations : Clause 233(1)-(4) of the Income Tax B...
    Determination of Tonnage for Shipping Companies under Indian Tax Law : Clause 227(9) of the Income T...
    Compliance Requirements under India's Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 232(21) of Income Tax Bill, 2025 v...
    Charter-in Limits under India's Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 232(15)-(20) of the Income Tax Bill, 202...
    Minimum Training Mandates in India's Tonnage Tax Framework : Clause 232(12)-(14) of the Income Tax B...
    Evolving Compliance Obligations under the Tonnage Tax Scheme: Clause 232(1)-(11) of the Income Tax B...
    Examination of provision of Disqualification from Tonnage Tax Scheme : Clause 231(12) of the Income ...
    Examining Renewal Provisions for Tonnage Tax in Indian Shipping Taxation : Clause 231(10)-(11) of In...
    Duration and Cessation of Tonnage Tax Option : Clause 231(8)-(9) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Procedural framework for opting into the tonnage tax scheme : Clause 231(1)-(7) of Income Tax Bill, ...
    Legal and Practical Implications of Excluding Tonnage Tax Profits from Book Profits in Indian Shippi...
    Capital Gains taxation on Qualifying Ships : Clause 229(8) to (10) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Loss Set-Off and Apportionment in the Shipping Industry : Clause 230(2)-(4) of the Income Tax Bill, ...
    Exclusion of Deductions and Loss Set-Off under the Tonnage Tax Regime : Clause 230(1) of the Income ...
    Depreciation and Asset Classification under Tonnage Tax : Clause 229(1)-(7) of the Income Tax Bill, ...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Hierarchy of tax authorities clarified: consolidation and streamlined nomenclature aim to centralise appellate functions and improve clarity.
    Clause 236 consolidates the hierarchy of income-tax authorities-from the Central Board of Direct Taxes to Inspectors and Tax Recovery Officers-streamlining nomenclature and grouping alternative designations. It notably omits Deputy Commissioners (Appeals), signalling possible consolidation of first-level appellate functions at higher levels, and leaves allocation of specific powers and appellate responsibilities to subordinate rules and notifications.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax exclusion: anti abuse power to remove companies from the regime where transactions lack bona fide commercial purpose.
    Clause 234(4)-(7) empowers the Assessing Officer to exclude a tonnage tax company by written order where transactions amount to an abuse of the tonnage tax scheme, operating retrospectively from the first day of the tax year in which the transaction was entered into; exclusion requires prior show cause notice and higher-level approval, and does not apply where the company satisfies the Assessing Officer that the transaction was a bona fide commercial arrangement not entered into for tax advantage.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Anti-abuse safeguards in tonnage tax: exclusion applies where arrangements produce tax advantages for non-eligible activities.
    Clause 234(1)-(3) excludes the tonnage tax scheme where a tonnage tax company is party to any transaction or arrangement that constitutes an abuse by resulting, or that would but for the clause have resulted, in a tax advantage for persons other than the tonnage tax company or for the company in respect of its non-tonnage activities. "Tax advantage" includes manipulation of expense or interest allowances or cost allocation affecting non-tonnage income or loss, and transactions producing more than ordinary profits from tonnage tax activities.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Temporary cessation of operations preserves tonnage tax continuity, but temporary loss of qualifying status suspends benefits for that period.
    A company is deemed to be operating a qualifying ship for tonnage tax purposes during periods of temporary cessation of operations, so long as the cessation is not permanent; however, a ship that temporarily ceases to meet the statutory criteria of a qualifying ship is excluded from qualifying status for the period of non-qualification and cannot attract tonnage tax benefits during that time.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Continuity of tonnage tax benefits preserves scheme application for qualifying companies after demerger, subject to statutory conditions.
    Where a demerged company transfers its business to a resulting company before expiry of its tonnage tax option, the tonnage tax scheme shall, subject to other provisions, apply to the resulting company for the unexpired period if it is a qualifying company; similarly, the demerged company retains its option for the unexpired period if it continues to be a qualifying company, with both continuities conditional on statutory eligibility, procedural compliance, and anti-avoidance requirements.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Continuity of tonnage tax: amalgamated qualifying shipping companies retain the scheme subject to qualifying status and option deadlines.
    Clause 233(1)-(4) secures continuity of the tonnage tax regime on amalgamation by applying the scheme to the amalgamated company if it remains a qualifying company, requiring non-tonnage amalgamated companies to elect the scheme within a prescribed short period, granting the amalgamated entity the longest unexpired option period when multiple merging companies are under the scheme, and excluding entities that failed to elect during the original implementation window from accessing the regime post-amalgamation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage determination by statutory certificates ensures objective tonnage income computation and limits administrative discretion, aligning with international practice.
    The net tonnage for tonnage income must be determined from prescribed certificates: Indian ships by Merchant Shipping Rules or the 1969 Convention certificate as applicable; foreign ships by a DG Shipping licence reflecting Flag State tonnage certificates or other evidence acceptable to the DG; inland vessels by Inland Vessels Act, 2021 certificates. Reliance on statutory certificates is central, reducing subjective measurement and constraining administrative assessment to verification of certificate authenticity.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax compliance: separate books and certified accountant's report required or tonnage tax option lapses for the year.
    Clause 232(21) makes the tonnage tax option contingent, each year, on maintaining separate books of account for qualifying ship operations and on furnishing a prescribed, duly signed and verified accountant's report before the specified filing date; failure of either requirement renders the tonnage tax option ineffective for that tax year.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Charter in cap limits chartered tonnage; breach triggers loss of tonnage tax benefit and possible scheme disqualification.
    Clause 232(15)-(20) limits chartered in net tonnage for tonnage tax electors, requires assessment on average net tonnage with the averaging method prescribed in consultation with the Director General of Shipping, excludes bareboat charter cum demise vessels from charter in calculations, and prescribes loss of tonnage tax benefit for a year of breach and permanent cessation of the option after two consecutive years of breach.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Minimum training requirement - automatic loss of tonnage tax eligibility after consecutive noncompliance; annual certification required with tax return.
    Companies opting for the tonnage tax regime must train trainee officers as per guidelines of the Director-General of Shipping and furnish an annually issued compliance certificate in the prescribed form with their tax return; sustained non-compliance over consecutive years results in automatic cessation of the company's option for the tonnage tax scheme from the year following the concluding year of default. Delegation to the Director-General allows technical adaptability but leaves open statutory ambiguities on thresholds, partial compliance and transitional treatment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage Tax Reserve requirement ties tonnage tax access to reinvestment in qualifying shipping assets under the Bill.
    Clause 232 conditions tonnage tax access on crediting a specified portion of book profit from qualifying shipping activities to a Tonnage Tax Reserve Account, usable within eight years for acquisition of a new ship or inland vessel; interim restrictions prevent distribution or foreign remittance, and proportional re taxation, carryforward rules, and cessation of the option after sustained default enforce compliance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax disqualification: companies face a ten-year bar on re-entry after opting out, default, or formal exclusion.
    Clause 231(12) bars a qualifying company from opting for the tonnage tax scheme for ten years where the company: voluntarily opts out; defaults in complying with the specified compliance provisions; or has its option excluded by a formal exclusion order, with the disqualification period measured from the date of the triggering event.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax renewal requires timely application and procedural parity with initial grant, subject to eligibility and potential ineligibility period.
    Clause 231(10) requires renewal of an approved tonnage tax option within one year from the end of the tax year in which the prior option ceases, with renewal discretionary and subject to approval or refusal by the competent authority. Clause 231(11) imports sub sections (1) to (10) to apply equally to renewals, ensuring procedural parity-application format, eligibility checks, opportunity of being heard, timelines and cessation consequences-but leaves unresolved whether benefits continue during pendency or whether delayed applications may be condoned.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax lock in establishes a multi year tenure and automatic cessation for qualification loss or compliance defaults.
    Clause 231(8)-(9) provides that an approved tonnage tax option remains in force for ten years from the tax year of exercise, and ceases from the tax year in which the company ceases to qualify, defaults on compliance under section 232(1)-(20), is excluded under the exclusion provision, or voluntarily declares in writing to the Assessing Officer that the part will not apply; on cessation, shipping profits are computed under the general provisions of the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax opting procedure ensures time-bound approval and procedural fairness under the updated legislative framework.
    A qualifying company must apply in the prescribed form to the Joint Commissioner within the statutory window; the Commissioner may call for documents, must afford an opportunity of being heard before refusing, and must communicate a written order within a set time measured from the end of the processing quarter. On approval, the tonnage tax regime applies from the tax year in which the option is exercised, with transitional provisions for IFSC units and further clauses governing duration, cessation, renewal and a bar on re-entry.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of book profits: tonnage tax income is removed from MAT computation to preserve the presumptive shipping regime.
    Clause 228(16) excludes the book profit or loss derived from the activities of a tonnage tax company, as defined in Clause 228(1), from the company's book profit for the purposes of section 206, thereby preventing MAT from applying to profits attributable to qualifying core and incidental shipping activities; the exclusion operates alongside detailed provisions on caps for incidental income, allocation of costs and depreciation, treatment of non qualifying ships, and transfer pricing adjustments.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Capital gains on qualifying ships taxed under tonnage tax regime with WDV computed for block of qualifying assets.
    Profits or gains on transfer of capital assets forming part of the block of qualifying ships are chargeable to income-tax, with capital gains computed under the capital gains provisions specified in the Bill. For that computation, references to "written down value of the block of assets" are to be read as the "written down value of the block of qualifying assets", and that WDV is to be determined by the method prescribed in sub-section (2) of Clause 229.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax loss set off limited to shipping income; pre option losses deemed set off and apportionment must be reasonable.
    Clause 230(2)-(4) (and mirror Section 115VM) deem pre option losses attributable to the tonnage tax business to have been set off against relevant shipping income while under the tonnage tax regime, bar their set off against non shipping income after opting in, and require any necessary apportionment to be made on a reasonable basis, creating documentary and evidentiary obligations and potential disputes over apportionment and the definition of relevant shipping income.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tonnage tax exclusion: carry forward and deductions barred, creating a self contained computation regime for shipping companies under new bill
    Clause 230(1) creates a self contained tonnage tax computation by deeming all business losses, allowances and deductions to have been given full effect in their year of origin, prohibiting carry forward or set off of shipping business losses once under the tonnage regime, excluding general chapter based deductions from tonnage profits, and requiring written down values of assets to be computed as if depreciation had been claimed and allowed each relevant year.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Depreciation under tonnage tax: explicit WDV allocation formulas clarify asset classification and continuity of depreciation claims.
    Clause 229(1)-(7) mandates that, on entering the tonnage tax regime, depreciation be computed on the written down value attributable to qualifying ships by dividing the existing block WDV between qualifying and non qualifying assets using explicit proportional formulas; separate qualifying asset blocks are created, WDV is transferred proportionally upon reclassification, intra year depreciation is apportioned by days of use, and the resulting WDV blocks are deemed carried forward from the preceding year to preserve continuity.

    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