Input tax credit distribution expanded to cover interstate reverse-charge supplies with revised ITC reporting and return rules.
Amendments permit Input Service Distributors to distribute input tax credit for interstate reverse-charge supplies, adjust ITC statement and return provisions by removing "auto generated" phrasing and enabling additional prescribed details and filing conditions, and require reversal of corresponding ITC where a credit-note reduces a supplier's liability; they add definitions for local/municipal funds and Unique Identification Marking to enable a Track and Trace Mechanism, insert an enabling Track and Trace provision with penalties, amend Schedule III treatment for certain SEZ/FTWZ supplies with no refunds, and impose mandatory pre-deposit of penalty amounts in specified appeals.

Section 130 CGST: direct invocation permitted only with recorded reasons and material proving intent to evade tax.
Section 129 pertains to goods in transit, while Section 130 has broader scope allowing direct invocation where material shows a clear intent to evade tax; such direct action requires specific, recorded reasons based on material, an adequate show-cause notice that sets out those reasons, and compliance with prescribed formalities so that authorities do not base confiscation on conclusions absent from the notice.

Rebuttable presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act: burden can be discharged on preponderance of probabilities by accused.
The court holds that the statutory presumption in favour of the cheque holder is rebuttable and may be displaced by the drawer upon adducing evidence which, on the preponderance of probabilities, shows the cheque was not issued for a legally recoverable debt; inconsistencies in the holder's case, absence of supporting financial records, and unexplained issuance circumstances are salient in assessing rebuttal.

Condonation of delay: equitable consideration where bona fide technical failures and professional disruptions impede tax filing.
Condonation of short delays in filing income tax returns must be governed by principles of equity and fairness, with bona fide explanations such as portal technical failures and unforeseeable disruptions at a chartered accountant's premises meriting empathetic, case sensitive assessment rather than mechanical rejection. Where assessees rely on professional intermediaries, corroborative evidence of genuine operational impediments is a relevant consideration in exercising discretionary condonation to facilitate compliance objectives.

Pre-deposit requirement: GSTN portal payment records can establish compliance, requiring authorities to permit clarification and supporting proof.
System-generated GSTN records - including the appeal memorandum, electronic ledger payment screenshots and provisional acknowledgment - can suffice to demonstrate compliance with the pre-deposit requirement, and GSTN portal registration may establish an authorized signatory; where doubts exist the Appellate Authority must afford an opportunity to clarify and permit production of supporting board resolutions or powers of attorney.

Natural justice breached where appeal was dismissed for signatory authority without opportunity to respond; hearing and reasoned reconsideration required.
Dismissal of a tax appeal solely for lack of authority of the signatory, without calling on the appellant to clarify or providing verification, breaches the principle of natural justice. Doubts about signatory authority require an opportunity to explain; decision-making must produce a reasoned order addressing submissions, provide advance notice of personal hearing, and disclose any external orders or judgments relied upon to enable the appellant to respond.

Inordinate delay in adjudication: unexplained delays undermine natural justice and invalidate further administrative steps.
The challenge contested whether inordinate and unexplained delay in adjudication violated the principles of natural justice, causing serious prejudice by impairing the petitioner's ability to defend. The court found the respondents' explanations-frequent changes in adjudicating officers and accommodation of co-noticees-insufficient, applied precedent that excessive unexplained delay vitiates proceedings, and emphasized the duty of authorities to conduct timely adjudication or supply adequate justification for delay.

Disallowance of expenditure related to exempt income: apportionment required and actual exempt income is a prerequisite.
Disallowance of expenditure relating to exempt income requires identification and apportionment of expenses attributable to non taxable receipts; only expenditure expended to earn taxable income may be claimed. Courts interpret "in relation to" expansively and reject reliance on the spender's dominant purpose. The existence of actual exempt income is necessary to invoke the disallowance rule, and post enactment explanatory amendments that alter prior law are not retrospective.

Proceeds of crime: pre-existing property cannot be provisionally attached absent equivalent-value connection under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
Provisional attachment under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires a reasonable nexus between the attached property and the alleged criminal activity; only property derived from criminal activity, the value of such property, or equivalent-value property held domestically qualifies. Pre-existing immovable assets purchased before the scheduled offence cannot be attached absent qualification as equivalent-value property, whereas challenges to movable asset attachments are to be pursued through available remedies.

Make available requirement for technical services prevents taxation where consultancy did not transfer technical knowledge, preserving source-based taxation.
The fees did not qualify as Fees for Technical Services because the make available condition-requiring transfer, transmission or enablement of technical knowledge-was not met; the domestic exception for services utilized to earn income from a source outside India applied since the services related to tournaments held abroad, and income attributable to any Service Permanent Establishment is taxable under the DTAA business profits regime.

Reasons to believe requirement in customs seizures: judicial review limits fact-finding and adjudication must address documentation and recordal of reasons.
Interpretation of the reasons to believe requirement under section 110 of the Customs Act centers on whether citation of statutory provisions in a seizure panchnama suffices versus the need for factual particulars. The court noted conflicting precedents, factual disputes about production of transport documents and e way bill timing, and emphasized that disputed factual issues fall to adjudicatory proceedings rather than writ review, urging expeditious adjudication and cooperation.

Deductibility under Section 80P(2)(d): interest from co operative bank deposits may qualify if linked to primary co operative activity.
Interest earned by credit co-operative societies from deposits with co-operative banks is examined for eligibility under Section 80P(2)(d), focusing on whether such receipts bear the requisite nexus to the societies' primary credit-providing activities and on the statutory meaning of co-operative bank as interpreted in judicial precedents that have largely favoured allowance of the deduction.

Arbitral autonomy: referral courts must limit Section 11 scrutiny to prima facie existence of arbitration agreements.
The referral court's inquiry under Section 11 is limited to the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement; issues such as alleged accord and satisfaction and mixed questions of law and fact do not negate the arbitration clause and are within the arbitral tribunal's exclusive competence. Legislative intent behind the 2015 amendments supports minimal judicial interference at the appointment stage, and limitation under Section 11(6) should be confined to timeliness, leaving substantive limitation defenses to the tribunal.

Mandatory Draft Assessment Order under Section 144C preserves DRP review and invalidates final assessments issued without it.
Section 144C establishes a self-contained, multi-tiered assessment regime for international-transaction assessees in which the Dispute Resolution Panel exercises independent, enhanced review distinct from Section 144B. Framing the draft assessment order is an integral statutory step that preserves the assessee's right to challenge proposed findings; omission of that draft-stage procedure is therefore a substantive breach of the Section 144C code rather than a mere procedural irregularity. Remand under Section 153(6) does not revive assessments once the limitation periods in sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 153 have expired.

Prospective application of tax amendment preserves taxpayer expectations and limits disallowance of expenses to stated effective years.
The issue is whether the Explanation to Section 14A introduced by the Finance Act, 2022 applies retrospectively or prospectively, particularly for assessment years where no exempt income arose. The Court analysed the Memorandum to the Finance Bill, relevant precedents, and the principle that tax laws altering existing legal positions are not to be given retrospective effect unless expressly or necessarily implied. It concluded the Explanation must operate prospectively from the effective date stated in the Memorandum, maintaining taxpayer expectations and legal certainty.

Taxation of Royalties: domestic law amendments cannot override DTAA interpretation; telecommunication payments not royalties.
The court held that unilateral domestic amendments to the statutory definition of royalty cannot alter the meaning of that term in a DTAA; treaty terms are to be interpreted by their plain meaning, guided by international law principles, OECD commentary, and precedents, and payments for telecommunication services or satellite transponder capacity do not qualify as royalties under the relevant DTAA.

Fe content on WMT basis determines export duty, lowering the applicable rate and enabling recovery of excess duty paid.
Assessment of iron ore export duty requires computation of Fe on a Wet Metric Ton basis by deducting moisture using the formula Iron content (as received) = Fe x (100 - M) / 100. Applying this WMT calculation against the customs notification framework that prescribes duty rates tied to measured Fe percentage results in a lower duty classification and a corresponding right to recover any excess duty paid when the measured Fe falls below the specified threshold.

Service of show cause notice: ensure proper notice and opportunity before tax orders; fresh notice and reasoned hearing required.
Proper service and transparent consideration of assessee replies are procedural prerequisites before passing tax assessment orders. Where portal non-reflection of notices and uncertainty about consideration of replies arises, the assessee is entitled to benefit of doubt. The court required that the impugned order be treated as a notice for filing a written reply within a short period, directed issuance of a fresh notice in the prescribed manner with a clear minimum notice period, mandated the assessee's appearance, and obliged the assessing officer to pass a reasoned and speaking order within a defined timeframe after valid service.

Customs duty liability on redemption: assessment under Section 28 triggers interest under Section 28AB for delayed payment.
The court concluded that duty liability arises when an owner redeems confiscated goods under Section 125(2), while the procedural assessment and determination of that duty can be carried out under Section 28, and that the interest provision of Section 28AB applies where Section 28 is invoked for such duties; the Jagdish Cancer ratio does not preclude applying Section 28 in confiscation-redemption assessments.

Limitation under Section 153C: six-year period runs from receipt of seized documents, requiring assessment under Section 153C.
Where seized assets, documents and digital data recovered from a third party are found to relate to another person, the date on which the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction receives those seized materials is the deemed date of search for reckoning the six-year limitation period; that deemed date determines the relevant assessment year and which prior six assessment years fall under the special procedure for initiating assessments under Section 153C.