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
    Evolution of Executive Scheme-Making Powers in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 532 of the Income Tax ...
    Withdrawal of Statutory Approvals under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 529 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Legal Perspectives on Condonation of Delay in Income Tax Approvals : Clause 528 of Income Tax Bill, ...
    Executive Discretion and Tax Incentives in India's Mineral Oil Sector : Clause 527 of the Income Tax...
    Immunity and Jurisdictional Bar in Tax Administration : Clause 526 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Authorisation and Assessment in Multi-Person Search Cases : Clause 525 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Rebuttable Presumptions in Tax Searches : Clause 524 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292C o...
    Deeming Service of Notice in Tax Proceedings Under Income Tax Law : Clause 523 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice : Clause 522 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292B of...
    Exclusion of Probationary Relief for Tax Offenders : Clause 521 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...
    Jurisdictional Thresholds for Tax Offence Trials : Clause 520 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Secti...
    Immunity from Prosecution under Income Tax Law : Clause 519 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section...
    Practical Impact of Indemnity Provisions in Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Legal Mandate for Receipts in Indian Tax Law : Clause 517 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 2...
    Evolution of Rounding Off Provisions regarding tax payable in Indian Tax Law : Clause 516 of the Inc...
    Legal Framework of Rounding Off Total Income in India tax Law : Clause 516 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    The Right of Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 515 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Analysis of Registered Valuer Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 513 of the Income Ta...
    Public Disclosure of Tax Offenders : Clause 512 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 287 of the ...
    Legal Framework for International Group Reporting : Clause 511 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
❯❯
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
    Power to frame schemes expands executive authority to enable faceless, technology-driven tax administration and modify statutory application.
    Clause 532 grants the Central Government authority to make schemes for any purpose of the Act to enhance efficiency, transparency and accountability by eliminating taxpayer interface and optimising resources, and to issue notifications modifying the application of any provision of the Act to give effect to such schemes; it also permits amendment of schemes under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and requires that notifications be laid before each House of Parliament.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Withdrawal of approvals: authorities may rescind statutory tax approvals after recording reasons and giving a fair hearing.
    Clause 529 authorises the Central Government, the Board, or income-tax authorities to withdraw any approval under the Act at any time after recording reasons and giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, even if the enabling provision lacks an express withdrawal clause. The provision mandates recorded reasons and a hearing but leaves "approval" undefined, does not specify substantive grounds for withdrawal, and does not prescribe a limitation period, which may raise uncertainty and prompt judicial scrutiny of procedural adequacy.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: authority may excuse late tax approvals for sufficient cause, subject to discretionary review and safeguards.
    Clause 528 permits the Central Government or the Board to condone delays in obtaining approvals required before a specified date under the Act for "sufficient cause," vesting discretionary power in the same authority to excuse late applications across a broad range of approvals while leaving "sufficient cause," procedural steps, time limits and appeal mechanisms undefined.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Executive discretion in tax exemptions for mineral oil sector enables tailored fiscal relief to investors and service providers.
    Clause 527 vests the Central Government with discretionary power to grant exemptions, reductions or other modifications in income tax for persons engaged in prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils, including operators, service providers, suppliers and their employees; notifications must be laid before Parliament and key terms like "mineral oil" and "status" are defined or cross referenced in the Bill.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Bar on civil suits prevents civil court challenges to tax proceedings, preserving exclusive statutory remedies and good faith immunity.
    The provision bars any civil suit to set aside or modify "any proceeding taken or order made" under the Act and grants immunity to the Government and its officers for acts done or intended to be done in good faith, channeling challenges to the statutory appellate and revisionary framework while preserving writ review for ultra vires, mala fide, or constitutional breaches.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Authorisation for multi-person searches: single authorisations allowed, but assessments must be made separately for each person.
    Clause 525 permits a single search or requisition authorisation to name multiple persons without requiring separate instruments, and provides that such joint naming does not, by itself, constitute authorisation against an AOP or BOI. Notwithstanding a consolidated authorisation, assessment or reassessment must be made separately in the name of each person mentioned, preserving individualized tax liability determinations while allowing administrative consolidation of search procedures.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rebuttable presumption in tax searches shifts evidentiary burden to taxpayers and explicitly covers virtual digital assets.
    Clause 524 establishes a rebuttable presumption that items found in search or survey-books, documents, money, bullion, jewellery, other valuables and virtual digital assets-belong to the person in whose possession they were found; that contents of books and documents are true; that signatures and handwriting are authentic; and that stamped, executed or attested documents were duly executed, with identical presumptions applying to items requisitioned to officers as if discovered in a search.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Deeming validity of notice: participation or cooperation bars later objections unless raised before assessment completion.
    Clause 523 creates a deeming fiction that an assessee's appearance in proceedings or co-operation in an inquiry shall be treated as valid and timely service of any statutory notice, and it precludes the assessee from later objecting that the notice was not served, not timely served, or served improperly; however, this preclusion does not apply where the assessee raises the objection before completion of the assessment or reassessment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Substantial compliance preserves tax proceedings despite minor procedural errors when the instrument fulfils legislative intent.
    Clause 522 preserves the validity of returns, assessments, notices, summonses and other proceedings despite clerical, typographical or similar procedural defects, provided the document or action is in substance and effect in conformity with the intent and purposes of the Act; it does not cure defects that go to jurisdiction, authority, limitation, or breaches of natural justice, and mirrors Section 292B to maintain continuity of judicial interpretation and application.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of probationary relief bars adult tax offenders from probationary provisions, preserving minors' exception and updating criminal code reference.
    The clause mandates that the Probation of Offenders Act and the analogous provision in the new criminal procedure code shall not apply to persons convicted under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, except for those under eighteen, thereby removing judicial discretion for adult tax offenders, updating statutory references, and preserving a minors' exception while raising procedural questions on age determination and scope.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional threshold: income tax offences must be tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class, altering forum nomenclature.
    Clause 520 mandates that no court inferior to a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, creating a uniform jurisdictional threshold for all tax offences. The provision modernizes terminology compared with Section 292 of the 1961 Act by omitting presidency magistrates, aligning with the CrPC framework and metropolitan magistrates' equivalence, while leaving potential ambiguities about special statute courts and transitional application. Its practical effect is to require complaints be filed before competent magistrates and to enable jurisdictional challenges where proceedings are instituted in inferior forums.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Immunity from prosecution: conditional grants require full and true disclosure and are revocable if falsehood or concealment is found.
    Immunity from prosecution allows the Central Government to grant discretionary, conditional immunity to persons concerned in concealment of income or tax evasion in exchange for a full and true disclosure, with written reasons required for the grant; acceptance limits prosecution and penalty to the scope specified, while failure to fully comply permits the government to record a finding and withdraw immunity, rendering the person liable to trial and penalty as if immunity had never been granted.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Indemnity for withholding agents protects deductors from civil claims when acting lawfully under the tax statute.
    Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 provides a statutory indemnity for persons who deduct, retain, or pay tax in pursuance of the tax statute in respect of income belonging to another person, serving as a defence against civil claims by the income recipient where the agent acts lawfully; the protection is conditional on actions being within the scope of the statute and leaves unresolved issues about consequential losses, claim procedures, and interaction with other legal remedies.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Receipt obligation: mandatory issuance of receipts for any tax money paid or recovered, securing payment evidence and taxpayer protection.
    The provision mandates that a receipt shall be given for any money paid or recovered under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, covering voluntary payments and enforced recoveries under the Act. The clause is mandatory but silent on form, content, timing, issuing authority, mode of delivery, and consequences for non-issuance; subordinated rules and administrative practice-including electronic acknowledgments-are expected to fill these operational gaps. The receipt serves as an acknowledgement and evidentiary record rather than an automatic discharge of liability.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding off rules: ignore paise then round to nearest ten rupees, making the rounded figure legally operative.
    The provision applies rounding to computed total income and to amounts payable or refundable by first ignoring paise and then rounding the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten rupees-rounding up where the units digit is five or more and rounding down where it is less than five-and declares the rounded amount to be the deemed operative total income or amount payable or refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding of tax amounts: unified rule mandates nearest multiple rounding for total income, payable and refundable amounts.
    Clause 516 prescribes a mandatory two-step rounding mechanism: ignore any paise, then round the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten-rounding up if the last digit is five or more and down if less than five-and deems the rounded figure to be the amount of total income, amount payable, or amount refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Right of representation: statutory authorisation and disqualification framework balancing access to representation with safeguards.
    The statute permits an assessee to appear by an authorised representative across all proceedings while preserving mandatory personal attendance for oath examination; it defines eligible representatives (including professionals, bank officers, relatives, legacy practitioners and any persons as prescribed), enumerates exhaustive exclusions and disqualifications to prevent conflicts of interest, distinguishes disciplinary regimes for professionals and nonprofessionals (with Rule 52 designating prescribed tax authorities to disqualify nonprofessionals), and mandates procedural safeguards including a hearing and appeal mechanism, while carrying forward prior disqualifications.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Registered valuer representation enables technical valuation expertise in tax proceedings, subject to personal-examination exception and updated registration framework.
    Clause 513 grants an assessee the discretionary right to attend valuation-related proceedings before income-tax authorities or the Appellate Tribunal through a "registered valuer," excludes cases where personal attendance is required for examination on oath or affirmation, and defines "registered valuer" by reference to section 514 of the Bill, thereby creating a self-contained regime that modernizes registration, oversight, and professional standards for valuers.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Public disclosure of tax offenders can deter non-compliance while imposing reputational consequences under discretionary publication powers.
    Clause 512 empowers the Central Government to publish names and particulars of assessees when it considers such publication necessary or expedient in the public interest, subject to a safeguard that penalty-related publication await exhaustion or non-pursuit of appellate remedies, and permits publication of partners, directors and other associated persons if circumstances justify it. The clause modernises language and cross-references from Section 287 of the 1961 Act while preserving substantive continuity, raising interpretive concerns about the breadth of "particulars" and the subjectivity of "public interest."
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Country-by-Country reporting requires multinational groups to submit consolidated jurisdictional tax and economic data for risk assessment.
    Clause 511 mandates Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting by parent entities or alternate reporting entities resident in India and requires Indian constituent entities to notify the tax authority of the parent or ARE. It prescribes report contents-aggregate jurisdictional financial and economic indicators, constituent identification, and business activities-provides a secondary filing route where the parent's jurisdiction lacks filing or exchange, allows designation of a single Indian filer, sets a revenue threshold for applicability, and grants verification powers to the authority, with procedural details to be prescribed.

    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

      Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST Act

      21 August, 2024

      Contents
      Acts
      Plus +
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Deciphering High Court Judgment on Maintainability of Appeal under GST Act

      Reported as:

      2024 (2) TMI 1069 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

      Introduction

      This article provides a comprehensive analysis of a recent judgment delivered by the High Court (HC) regarding the maintainability of an appeal u/s 107 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (GST Act). The court examined the interplay between the limitation period prescribed u/s 107 of the GST Act and the applicability of Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963, which allows for the extension of the prescribed period in certain circumstances.

      Arguments Presented

      The petitioner's counsel argued that although the appeal u/s 107 of the GST Act was filed beyond the prescribed time limit, Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be applicable. This argument was based on a Division Bench judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Chakraborty & Sons Versus Union of India & Ors. - 2023 (12) TMI 290 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT, which held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act could be invoked since Section 107 of the GST Act does not expressly or impliedly exclude its application.

      Discussions and Findings of the Court

      Exclusion of the Limitation Act in Special Statutes

      The court referred to its previous judgment in M/s Abhishek Trading Corporation Versus Commissioner (Appeals) And Another - 2024 (2) TMI 1214 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, wherein it had relied on the Supreme Court judgments in SINGH ENTERPRISES Versus COMMISSIONER OF C. EX., JAMSHEDPUR - 2007 (12) TMI 11 - Supreme Court, and Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise Versus M/s Hongo India (P) Ltd. & Anr. - 2009 (3) TMI 31 - Supreme Court. The court categorically held that the Central Goods and Services Act is a special statute and a self-contained code, and Section 107 of the Act has an inbuilt mechanism that has impliedly excluded the application of the Limitation Act.

      Strict Interpretation of Fiscal Statutes

      The court emphasized that the provisions of a fiscal statute, such as the GST Act, must be strictly construed and interpreted. It referred to the judgments of the Kerala High Court in Penuel Nexus Pvt. Ltd., Rep. By ITS Managing Director Sri. M.O. Joseph Versus The Additional Commissioner Headquarters (Appeals) , State Tax Officer, Taxpayer Services Circle, Cochin - 2023 (6) TMI 941 - KERALA HIGH COURT and its own judgment in M/s Garg Enterprises Versus State of U.P. And 2 Others - 2024 (1) TMI 1207 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT, which reiterated the principle that the GST Act is a special statute and a self-contained code, and the Limitation Act will not apply.

      Rationale behind Exclusion of the Limitation Act

      The court highlighted the significance of limitation provisions in taxing statutes like the GST Act. These provisions ensure timely resolution of disputes, promote efficiency and fairness in tax administration, and facilitate effective tax compliance. The court emphasized that Section 107 of the GST Act operates as a complete code, explicitly delineating limitation periods for filing appeals and implicitly excluding the application of general limitation provisions such as Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

      Analysis and Decision by the Court

      The court analyzed the conflicting interpretations concerning the exclusion of Section 5 of the Limitation Act in the context of Section 107 of the GST Act. It considered the rationale behind the exclusion of the Limitation Act in certain special statutes, particularly in the context of taxation, where strict procedural requirements and time-bound deadlines are necessary for expeditious resolution of tax disputes and revenue certainty.

      The court rejected the judgment rendered by the Calcutta High Court in the matter of S.K. Chakraborty & Sons, stating that it failed to adequately consider the authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Singh Enterprises and Hongo India, and hence, the said judgment is of no precedential value.

      Ultimately, the court dismissed the present writ petition, holding that the appeal filed by the petitioner was rightly dismissed on the ground of limitation, as it was filed approximately 66 days beyond the date of limitation, and Section 5 of the Limitation Act could not be invoked to condone the delay.

      Doctrine or Legal Principle Discussed

      The judgment primarily dealt with the doctrine of strict interpretation of fiscal statutes and the exclusion of the general Limitation Act in the context of special statutes like the GST Act, which have their own specific limitation provisions tailored to expedite the resolution of tax-related matters.

      Comprehensive Summary of the Judgment

      The High Court, in this judgment, upheld the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal u/s 107 of the GST Act on the ground of limitation. The court rejected the petitioner's argument that Section 5 of the Limitation Act should be applicable to condone the delay in filing the appeal. The court emphasized that the GST Act is a special statute and a self-contained code, and Section 107 has an inbuilt mechanism that impliedly excludes the application of the Limitation Act.

      The court highlighted the significance of limitation provisions in taxing statutes like the GST Act, which are designed to ensure timely resolution of disputes, promote efficiency and fairness in tax administration, and facilitate effective tax compliance. The court relied on authoritative pronouncements of the Supreme Court and judgments of other High Courts to reinforce the principle that fiscal statutes must be strictly interpreted, and general limitation provisions like Section 5 of the Limitation Act cannot be invoked to condone delays in filing appeals under specific limitation provisions of special statutes like the GST Act.

      The court rejected the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of S.K. Chakraborty & Sons, which had held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act could be applied to appeals u/s 107 of the GST Act, stating that it failed to adequately consider the relevant Supreme Court precedents.

      In conclusion, the court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the dismissal of the petitioner's appeal on the ground of limitation and affirming the principle that the specific limitation provisions under the GST Act operate as a complete code, excluding the application of general limitation provisions like Section 5 of the Limitation Act.

       

       


      Full Text:

      2024 (2) TMI 1069 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax