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
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 282 "Time limit for notices u/ss 280 and 281." between the Income-Tax Act, 202...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 281 "Procedure before issuance of notice u/s 280." between the Income-Tax Act,...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 279 "Income escaping assessment." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed)...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 274 "Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases." be...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 271 "Best judgment assessment" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) an...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 270 "Assessment" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-T...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 267 "Tax on updated return." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and ...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 266 "Self-assessment." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the In...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 263 "Return of income." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the I...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 261 "Interpretation." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Inc...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 259 "Power to call for information by prescribed income-tax authority." betwee...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 257 "Proceedings before income-tax authorities to be judicial proceedings." be...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 256 "Power of certain income-tax authorities." between the Income-Tax Act, 202...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 253 "Powers of survey." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the I...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 251 "Copying, extraction, retention and release of books of account and docume...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 250 "Application of seized or requisitioned assets." between the Income-Tax Ac...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 248 "Powers to requisition." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and ...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 247 "Search and seizure." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 246 "Power regarding discovery, production of evidence, etc." between the Inco...
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Comparison of section 243 "Power to transfer cases." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) an...
❯❯
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 RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation period for tax notices extended in specified cases; possession or information triggers a longer issuance window.
    Section 282 prescribes time limits for notices relating to escaped income: a general four year bar (four years and three months for initiation notices), with an extension up to six years (six years and three months for initiation notices) where the Assessing Officer either has in his possession books of account or other documents/evidence showing substantial escaped income, or where information with the Assessing Officer indicates substantial escaped income; additionally, no notice may be issued within one year from the end of any tax year.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-notice hearing requirement: AO must serve show-cause and disclose information before issuing an escape-assessment notice.
    An Assessing Officer with information suggesting escaped income must serve a show-cause notice disclosing the information and allow the assessee to reply; after considering the reply and material on record the AO must obtain the prior approval of the specified authority before issuing a clause 280 notice. The pre-notice procedure is inapplicable where information arises from the scheme under section 260, Approving Panel directions under section 274(6), or findings in orders by an authority, Tribunal or court.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment powers: AO may assess escaped income and recompute allowances, even when certain procedural steps were not complied with.
    Clause 279 permits the Assessing Officer, in a permissive exercise of discretion, to assess or reassess income escaping assessment and to recompute losses, depreciation and other allowances for the relevant tax year; this authority is framed subject to the procedural framework of sections 280-286. Subsection (2) allows the AO during those proceedings to assess other issues that come to notice subsequently and, in earlier draft text, expressly permits action irrespective of certain procedural non compliance, although the enacted wording narrows that explicit non compliance exception.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Hierarchical approval for anti-avoidance: internal review can produce binding, non-appealable determinations affecting assessments and applicable tax years.
    Clause 274 permits an Assessing Officer to refer suspected impermissible avoidance arrangements to the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner, who must issue a reasons-based notice and afford a hearing; if not satisfied, the officer refers the matter to an Approving Panel. The Panel may order inquiries, call for records, specify tax years of applicability and issue binding, non-appealable directions; time limits and specified exclusions apply, and the Board will constitute and support Panels and may make rules for their functioning.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Best-judgment assessment: AO may determine income where required returns or responses to notices are not furnished.
    Section 271 empowers the Assessing Officer to make a best-judgment assessment where required returns are not furnished or where the assessee fails to comply with notices under sections 268 or 270(8); the AO must consider all relevant materials gathered and, as a general rule, provide an opportunity of being heard before determining income or loss, with a limited exception relieving the AO from issuing a separate show-cause notice if a earlier section 268(1) notice has been issued.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Summary processing of returns permits correction of arithmetical errors and apparent incorrect claims with adjustment of tax or refund.
    Clause 270 authorises summary processing of returns to correct arithmetical errors and certain incorrect claims apparent from any information in the return, compute tax/interest/fee and adjust payments to determine payable or refundable amounts, subject to prior intimation to the assessee and an opportunity to respond; strict post year end timelines and special sequencing protect exempt and non profit entities, and the Act adds an express ground permitting prescribed cross year consistency checks.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax on updated return requires pre-filing payment of tax, interest and additional levy, increasing compliance obligations.
    Clause 267 requires that where an updated return under section 263(6) results in tax payable the assessee must, before furnishing the updated return, pay the tax, interest, any fee for delay/default and an additional income-tax computed on the aggregate of tax and interest; proof of payment must accompany the updated return. Specified credits, prior payments and interest already paid are to be set off in computing the net liability.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Self-assessment requirement: pre-payment of tax, interest and fee before filing specified income-tax returns, with proof attached.
    The clause requires payment of tax, interest and fee before filing specified income-tax returns where tax remains payable after deducting advance tax, source deductions, specified foreign tax reliefs and tax credits; returns must be accompanied by proof of payment, interest under the Act is computed on declared tax reduced by those credits, and a defined "assessed tax" serves as the base for interest on advance tax shortfall.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory filing duties and updated return limits reshape corrective filing eligibility and compliance obligations.
    Section 263 imposes mandatory filing duties for enumerated classes, prescribes due dates by category, empowers the Board to prescribe forms and particulars, and allows the Central Government to exempt classes. It distinguishes late returns, revised returns (both within nine months or before assessment completion), and an updated return remedy within a multi year window that is barred where updated filings would claim losses, reduce tax, produce refunds, duplicate updates, or where assessments, possession of information, international or internal information exchange, prosecutions, searches, surveys, requisitions or specified notices have intervened. Assessing Officers may treat unrectified defective returns as invalid after a short cure period.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Digital evidence parity: seized electronic backups treated as books of account, extending tax search powers into virtual spaces.
    Clause 261 defines terms governing Chapter XIV search, seizure and requisition powers, treating material seized to include books of account, documents, digital data storage devices, computer systems and specialised programme backups and directing that such material be construed as books of account. It broadly defines computer system and virtual digital space to include cloud and remote servers, social media, online financial platforms and application platforms. The clause identifies the classes of approving, authorised and competent officers and ties the operative date for search or requisition to the last panchnama entry or the actual receipt of books, documents, computer systems or assets.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Power to call for information: tax authority may require relevant records for verification, subject to defined scope of proceeding.
    A prescribed income tax authority may issue notices requiring persons to furnish information for verification of information in the authority's possession that is useful for, or relevant to, any inquiry or proceeding under the Act; the authority may specify form, manner and time for compliance and may process and utilise such information under a scheme notified under section 260. The enacted Section 259 adds subsection (3) linking the term "proceeding" to the meaning in section 253, clarifying the definitional scope of notices.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Judicial character of tax proceedings clarified; civil court deeming limited and excludes a specified statutory chapter.
    Section 257 deems proceedings before income-tax authorities to be judicial proceedings for specified provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and deems income-tax authorities to be Civil Courts for the purposes of section 215 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, but expressly excludes application of that deeming for the purposes of Chapter XXVIII of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Enquiry powers: specified senior income-tax officers authorised to exercise Assessing Officer powers for statutory enquiries.
    Section 256 vests enquiry authority in specifically listed senior officers - Principal Director General/Director General, Principal Director/Director, Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner, Principal Commissioner/Commissioner and Joint Commissioner - and grants them Assessing Officer-like powers to make enquiries under the Act, including summons and document requisition, while the clause contains no procedural provisos or territorial limits and therefore relies on other statutory or subordinate provisions for operational safeguards and delegation mechanics.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Survey powers over electronic records and premises enable inspection, technical access and limited impoundment for tax compliance verification.
    Survey powers authorise entry into premises where business, profession or charitable activities are carried on to inspect books, documents, electronic media and computer systems and to require necessary technical and other assistance including access codes; officers may verify assets and stock, make extracts or copies, record statements on oath, prepare inventories and impound or retain records or computer systems after recording reasons, with retention beyond the initial statutory period requiring prior approval and temporal limits on entry applicable to business and other premises.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retention limits for seized material clarified, with supervised copying rights and an administrative remedy to challenge extensions.
    Clause 251 requires transfer of seized assets and material to the territorial Assessing Officer where the seizing authorised officer lacks jurisdiction, mandates supervised opportunity for the person to make copies or extracts, prescribes statutory retention limits tied to assessment or recomputation events with written reasons and approving authority approval for extensions, and preserves a right to apply to the Board against approvals for extended retention.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Application of seized assets: assets may be applied to recover tax liabilities, subject to explanation-based release and distraint.
    The provision authorises recovery from assets seized or requisitioned under search or requisition to satisfy tax liabilities, including penalty and interest (excluding advance tax), aggregating liabilities arising before, during assessments consequent to the search, and those connected to settlement proceedings; the enacted text expressly includes block-period assessments under Part B of Chapter XVI. Release within the statutory period requires the Assessing Officer to be satisfied on the basis of the explanation furnished about nature and source, recovery of existing liabilities, and prior commissioner-level approval, while non-monetary assets are deemed under distraint and may be realised as prescribed.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Power to requisition: tax officers may compel delivery of materials and electronic evidence held by other authorities.
    Clause 248 empowers an approving authority to authorise specified tax officers to require delivery of assets, books, documents, electronic information or computer systems held by officers or authorities under other laws where persons served with summonses or notices fail to produce material, where material will be useful to tax proceedings and would not be returned, or where custody assets represent undisclosed income; post-delivery, designated procedural seizure, custody and preservation provisions apply with the requisitioning officer substituted for the authorised officer.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Search and seizure powers expanded to include virtual digital spaces, compelled access and evidentiary presumptions for tax investigations.
    Clause 247 authorises income tax officers to enter and search physical premises and virtual digital spaces when records or assets relevant to tax proceedings or undisclosed income are believed to be present, including compelled technical assistance, overriding access codes, copying electronic data, inventory and seizure (excluding stock in trade), and deemed seizure where removal is impracticable; it cross references IT law, applies evidentiary presumptions to found material, and provides limited procedural timelines and approvals while leaving detailed safeguards and rules to be prescribed.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Discovery and production powers: tax authorities may compel evidence and attendance, subject to limited retention safeguards.
    The provision confers court-like powers on enumerated income-tax authorities to compel discovery, attendance, examination on oath, production of books and issuance of commissions for tax purposes; it allows certain authorities to exercise these powers even absent pending proceedings, ties investigative authority for senior officers to a jurisdictional nexus and suspicion of concealment, and authorises impoundment and, in the Act, explicit custody and retention of documents subject to a fifteen-day initial limit, recorded reasons and prior sanction for extensions.
    Act RulesIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Case transfer power: authorities may transfer tax cases with recorded reasons and limited hearing requirements, preserving continuity of proceedings.
    A specified income-tax authority may transfer any case between Assessing Officers under its control or, where authorities differ, by agreement or by an order of the Board (or an authority the Board specifies by notification). The authority must record reasons and, "wherever it is possible to do so," afford the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard, except for transfers between officers in the same city/locality/place; transfers may occur at any stage and notices already issued need not be re issued. The enacted text consolidates the temporal definition of "case" and makes minor drafting refinements.

    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