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
    Determination of tax liability which no tax is payable under the provisions of the Act : Clause 190 ...
    Definition for the operation of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) : Clause 184 of Income Tax Bi...
    Legislative tool curbing aggressive tax planning and abusive tax avoidance Scheme : Clause 183 of th...
    Procedural Safeguards and the Scope of GAAR : Clause 183 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 100 of...
    Curbing aggressive tax avoidance strategies : Clause 182 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 99...
    Continuation and refinement of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule : Clause 181 of the Income Tax Bill, ...
    Statutory backbone of India's General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) : 180 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    "Curbing aggressive tax avoidance strategies" under the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) : Clause ...
    Countering the tax avoidance through codification of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) : Clause...
    limitation on Debt interest deduction as expenses in cross-border transactions : Clause 177 of Incom...
    Comprehensive framework for dealing with transactions with any notified jurisdictional areas : Claus...
    Anti-Avoidance Provisions in Securities Transactions : Clause 175 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. S...
    Designed provisions to counteract tax avoidance schemes involving cross-border transactions : Clause...
    Important Definition within the framework of transfer pricing and anti-avoidance measures : Clause 1...
    Statutory Reporting & Penalties for persons entering into international and specified domestic trans...
    Revamped framework of the Transfer Pricing documentation & Penalties : Clause 171 of the Income Tax ...
    Harmonizing India's Secondary Adjustment Regime in Transfer Pricing : Clause 170 of the Income Tax B...
    Streamlining APA Implementation and Transfer Pricing Compliance : Clause 169 of Income Tax Bill, 202...
    Enhancing Certainty and Compliance in Transfer Pricing through Advance Pricing Agreements : Clause 1...
    Special provisions concerning the avoidance of tax, specifically empowering to Board to make "safe h...
❯❯
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
    Determination of tax where exempt income is included: deduction at the average tax rate neutralises tax on non chargeable income.
    Clause 190 provides that where total income includes income on which no income-tax is payable, the assessee is entitled to a deduction from the tax chargeable equal to the tax computed at the average rate of income-tax on that non-taxable amount; the average rate is derived by dividing total tax by total income and applying that rate to the exempt portion to neutralise any tax attributable to non-chargeable income.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti Avoidance Rule expansion: new accommodating party concept widens GAAR reach and tightens tax planning scrutiny.
    Clause 184 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 largely carries forward Section 102's wide definitions for GAAR-covering arrangement, asset, benefit, connected person, fund, party, step, and tax benefit-while introducing an accommodating party concept to capture third party facilitators, updating cross references and terminology (e.g., "tax year"), and explicitly including permanent establishments and treaty arrangements to strengthen anti avoidance coverage.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti-Avoidance Rule expanded to permit concurrent or substitutive application, increasing substance-over-form scrutiny.
    Clause 183 expands the statutory reach of the General Anti-Avoidance Rule (GAAR) by expressly permitting GAAR to apply "in addition to, or in lieu of" any other basis for determination of tax liability, while maintaining application "as per such guidelines and subject to such conditions, as prescribed." The clause enables authorities to apply a substance-over-form approach, allowing concurrent or exclusive use of GAAR alongside specific anti-avoidance or substantive provisions, and thereby alters the relationship between GAAR and SAARs previously left ambiguous under Section 101.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti Avoidance Rule: clause makes GAAR an overriding tool but conditions its use on prescribed procedural guidelines.
    Clause 183 preserves GAAR's authority to apply "in addition to, or in lieu of" other bases for tax determination, enabling recharacterisation of arrangements based on substantive economic realities. It uniquely conditions GAAR's exercise on "guidelines and...conditions, as prescribed," thereby mandating subordinate guidance to define thresholds, approval processes, taxpayer rights, documentation and timelines, with the intent of reducing arbitrariness and enhancing predictability compared with the earlier framework.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti-Avoidance Rule: Treat connected and accommodating parties as one, enabling look-through of corporate structures.
    Clause 182 authorises treating connected persons as one, disregarding an accommodating party, treating an accommodating party and another party as the same person, and looking through corporate structures to determine whether a tax benefit exists, thereby enabling recharacterisation of arrangements that lack commercial substance and are designed to secure tax advantages.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti Avoidance Rule: broad authority to recharacterise and deny tax benefits where arrangements lack commercial substance.
    Clause 181 empowers tax authorities to neutralise tax benefits from arrangements lacking commercial substance by denying benefits (including treaty benefits) and imposing a range of consequences: disregarding or recharacterising steps or whole arrangements; treating arrangements as not entered into; treating accommodating or connected parties as one; reallocating tax attributes; recharacterising residence or situs; and looking through corporate structures. Clause 181(3) authorises reclassification of equity/debt and capital/revenue character. Rule 10UA limits consequences to the impermissible part of an arrangement, providing proportionality.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial substance test: disregard arrangements whose economic effect differs from form, focusing on round-trips and artificial parties.
    An arrangement may be disregarded for tax purposes if it lacks commercial substance, determined by whether the overall economic effect differs materially from its formal steps; key indicators include round-trip financing, an accommodating party, offsetting elements, disguised transactions, relocations made for tax benefit, and arrangements that do not materially affect business risks or cash flows independent of tax. Certain factors-duration, taxes paid, or an exit route-are not alone sufficient to establish substance, and the Bill omits a prior explicit definition of accommodating party, potentially creating interpretive uncertainty.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    GAAR main purpose test targets arrangements primarily motivated by tax benefit, with procedural safeguards for invocation.
    Clause 179 defines an impermissible avoidance arrangement under GAAR as one whose main purpose is obtaining a tax benefit and which meets at least one of four tainting conditions: arm's length departure, misuse or abuse of law, lack of commercial substance, or non bona fide means; it creates a rebuttable presumption placing the burden on the taxpayer for impugned steps and is operationalized through Rule 10UB's pre reference notice, Commissioner review, and Approving Panel safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    General Anti-Avoidance Rule: empowers authorities to disregard abusive arrangements and recharacterise tax consequences subject to safeguards.
    Clause 178 codifies GAAR with an overriding non-obstante effect, enabling authorities to declare an arrangement an "impermissible avoidance arrangement" and determine tax consequences, applying to whole arrangements or any step or part, based on tests of commercial substance and main purpose, while procedural safeguards-notice, hearing, and an approving panel-are prescribed to temper broad remedial powers.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Interest deduction limitation restricts deductible interest to a fixed EBITDA ratio with carryforward relief and specified carve-outs.
    Limitation on deductible interest in cross border related party financing restricts interest deductions where interest paid or payable by Indian entities to non resident associated enterprises is treated as excess interest, capped by a fixed ratio of the borrower's EBITDA and by interest payable to associated enterprises; disallowed amounts are carry forwardable subject to the same ratio, a deeming rule treats economically supported third party loans as associated enterprise debt, and specified carve outs apply to regulated financial entities and bona fide IFSC Finance Companies under operational rules.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transactions with non-cooperative jurisdictions: treated as international transactions, triggering transfer pricing scrutiny and denial of deductions.
    Clause 176 creates a regime for transactions with persons in notified jurisdictional areas: government notification power; deeming parties as associated enterprises and transactions as international transactions for transfer pricing; disallowance of deductions absent prescribed authorisation and documentation; deeming unexplained receipts as assessable income; and mandatory higher withholding on payments to NJA persons, with broad definitions and anticipated procedural rules similar to Rule 21AC.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Anti-avoidance in securities transactions deems income to the economic owner to prevent dividend and bonus stripping abuse.
    Clause 175 establishes a deeming regime that treats dividends and interest received by an interposed holder as the income of the original economic owner where securities are transferred and subsequently reacquired, limits taxpayer liability where similar securities are acquired, apportions income for partial-year beneficial interest holders, provides exceptions if the taxpayer proves absence of avoidance, disallows losses from dividend and bonus stripping within prescribed acquisition and disposal windows, and treats disallowed bonus-related losses as cost adjustments for retained units.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Deeming of income transferred to non-residents prevents tax avoidance by treating economic beneficiaries as taxable residents.
    Clause 174 applies where a transfer of assets, before or after commencement, results in income payable to a non-resident, and where the transfer alone or with associated operations confers on any person rights that give the power to enjoy that income. Such income is deemed to be that person's income for all purposes; related capital sums are treated to prevent disguise as non-taxable receipts. Exceptions exist for bona fide commercial transactions, with the taxpayer bearing the burden to satisfy the assessing authority.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Arm's length price principle reaffirmed and clarified in revised transfer pricing definitions, with expanded enterprise and transaction scope.
    Clause 173 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 restates and refines transfer pricing definitions: arm's length price as the benchmark between independent parties in uncontrolled conditions; an expansive definition of "enterprise" covering goods, IP, services, contracts, investments and securities (directly or via units/subsidiaries); "permanent establishment" as a fixed place of business; and "transaction" to include informal or non enforceable arrangements. The clause updates the "specified date" cross reference to the Bill's return filing provision and adopts more itemised drafting while maintaining substantive continuity with Section 92F.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Accountant's report requirement: certified transfer pricing reporting mandated for international and specified domestic transactions, with prescribed form and timing.
    Clause 172 requires every person entering into an international or specified domestic transaction in a tax year to obtain and furnish, by the specified date, a report from an accountant in the prescribed form, signed and verified as prescribed, setting forth such particulars as may be prescribed; the clause makes the obligation statutory, preserves applicability across taxpayer categories, and defers procedural form, verification and timing details to subordinate legislation while maintaining continuity with the existing reporting mechanics.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation: contemporaneous records required and rapid furnishing on demand to enhance transparency and enforcement.
    Clause 171 mandates maintenance and furnishing of prescribed transfer pricing documentation by persons entering into international or specified domestic transactions and by constituent entities of international groups, while delegating the specific content, retention periods, thresholds and filing procedures to rules. It enshrines a ten day furnishing requirement with possible extension, cross references definitions to the Bill's reporting provisions, and anticipates master file, local file and country by country reporting formats, thereby consolidating and modernising existing documentary obligations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Secondary adjustment: statutory deemed advance and repatriation rule with alternative option to pay additional tax in lieu of interest.
    Clause 170 mandates secondary adjustment where a primary transfer pricing adjustment of a prescribed monetary threshold increases income or reduces loss and excess money is not repatriated within the prescribed time; unrepatriated excess is deemed an advance to any non-resident associated enterprise and attracts notional interest computed as prescribed, with an alternative statutory option to pay an additional income-tax that is final and bars further credit or deduction.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance Pricing Agreement application: modified returns must align tax assessments with agreed transfer pricing terms and timelines.
    The statutory mechanism requires taxpayers to furnish a modified return limited to APA-impacted items within a prescribed post-agreement period, treats that filing as a return for assessment purposes, and directs assessing officers to modify completed assessments or complete pending proceedings in accordance with the APA; designated limitation and deeming provisions clarify timelines and the status of proceedings to ensure retrospective yet circumscribed implementation of the APA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Advance pricing agreements secure pre determination of arm's length pricing to enhance transfer pricing certainty and reduce disputes.
    Clause 168 preserves the APA framework by empowering the Board, with Central Government approval, to determine the arm's length price or manner of attributing income to India for international transactions; to specify statutory and rule based methods (with adjustments); to make APAs prevail over general transfer pricing provisions; to bind both taxpayers and tax authorities for covered transactions; to permit rollback for prior years; and to declare APAs void ab initio for fraud or misrepresentation, with corresponding limitation period consequences and scheme making authority for procedural rules.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Safe harbour rules mandate acceptance of declared transfer prices and deemed income, delivering taxpayer certainty while limiting administrative discretion.
    Clause 167 empowers the Board to prescribe safe harbour rules under which income-tax authorities shall accept the transfer price or deemed income declared by the assessee for transactions falling within section 9(2) and arm's length price provisions, creating a statutory presumption that reduces administrative discretion and dependency on detailed rule-making to specify eligibility, thresholds, documentation, and procedural requirements.

    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