Section 80-IA deduction attaches to eligible rail and power undertakings and remains available after amalgamation; captive use does not bar eligible-profit computation. Investment allowance was available for capital work-in-progress components installed and commissioned as part of an integrated plant, while balance additional depreciation could be claimed in the succeeding year. Sales-tax incentives linked to establishing units in backward areas were capital receipts, and further section 14A disallowance required recorded dissatisfaction with the taxpayer's accounts. Valid TDS/TCS certificates supported credit subject to verification. Research deduction could not be limited to Form 3CL quantification for the relevant period, and uncredited refund interest could not increase book profit. CSR assets did not qualify for depreciation; corporate guarantee pricing was 0.5%.

Madhya Pradesh GST administration is amended to provide automatic revocation of registration suspension on filing pending returns, re-credit of electronic credit ledger amounts after repayment of erroneous refunds, and UPI and IMPS payment options. Interest on delayed return filing is limited, in specified circumstances, to tax paid through the electronic cash ledger. Refund procedures cover export of electricity, export valuation, shipping-bill mismatches, and electronic transmission of withheld export refund claims. FORM GSTR-3B, GSTR-9 and GSTR-9C disclosures are revised for electronic commerce supplies, input tax credit, annual-return reporting and HSN particulars.

Scientific research approval is granted to Sir Ganga Ram Trust Society, Delhi, for donation-related tax treatment under the Income-tax Act, 2025, for tax years 2026-2027 through 2030-2031. The institution must comply with prescribed conditions, file an annual donation statement in Form No. 15 by 31 May following the relevant tax year, and provide each donor a Form No. 16 certificate specifying the donation amount.

Tariff values for specified imported edible oils, brass scrap, gold, silver and areca nuts are substituted under the customs valuation framework. Values for crude palm oil, refined and other palm oil, crude soybean oil, brass scrap and areca nuts remain unchanged. Gold and silver in specified concessional and other qualifying forms are assigned tariff values per prescribed unit of weight. The substituted tables take effect from 11 August 2026.

Correction of the enabling provision for the amendment to the State GST notification dated 14 November 2017 removes the reference to section 16(1). The amendment is to be read as made solely in exercise of powers under section 11(1), on the recommendations of the Council.

Madhya Pradesh SGST corrigendum corrects the wording in Notification No. F-A-3-81-2017-1-V(53), dated 26 July 2022. The phrase "Following further amendments in this" is substituted with "rescinds the", clarifying that the relevant regulatory action is rescission.

Foreign-exchange market conditions placed the rupee under pressure against the US dollar amid West Asia uncertainty, higher crude oil prices, and weaker domestic equity markets. Foreign institutional investor inflows and Reserve Bank of India intervention supported the rupee and limited further depreciation. Reported dollar sales through state-run banks helped contain downside pressure despite rising Brent crude prices and uncertainty concerning the Strait of Hormuz.

Omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 without a saving or sunset clause ended its refund restriction for pending proceedings concerning integrated tax paid on exports. Proceedings under an omitted rule can continue only where a saving provision or statutory legal fiction preserves them. The GST Council's advisory recommendation for prospective omission did not bind the rule-making authority. The Supreme Court treated the omission as applicable to all pending refund proceedings, dismissed challenges to that application, and dismissed challenges to the rule's validity as infructuous.

GST on actionable claims arising from online gaming and betting, including the retrospective valuation framework for online gaming and casino transactions, stood governed by Supreme Court findings that had already addressed every substantive challenge and prayer raised. No issue remained for independent consideration. The writ petition was dismissed in terms of that judgment and the interim order was vacated. Petitioners could submit replies to the show cause notice within the stipulated period, with the competent authority required to adjudicate in accordance with law and the Supreme Court findings.

GST on actionable claims connected with online gaming, fantasy sports, betting, gambling and casino transactions is addressed alongside the statutory valuation framework and the retrospective operation of the 2023 amendments. The challenge to the levy was dismissed in line with a Supreme Court judgment. The interim order was vacated, and the notice recipient was given eight weeks to respond to the show cause notice, followed by twelve weeks for adjudication.

Service of a GST show-cause notice solely by uploading it on the Common Portal is insufficient unless the recipient acknowledges receipt or files a reply. Ex parte adjudication initiated on that basis must be restored to the show-cause-notice stage. Where a contested GST order is served only through the portal, the appellate limitation period does not begin to run. Appellate dismissals as time-barred in those circumstances require restoration for adjudication on merits. These principles govern the disposal of writ petitions concerning portal-only service of GST notices and orders.

Alternative statutory remedy does not make a writ petition non-maintainable, but its entertainment remains discretionary. The statutory bar on parallel CGST proceedings applies only where State GST proceedings on the same subject matter were initiated earlier. Where the CGST show-cause notice preceded SGST notices, no jurisdictional defect arose under the bar. An earlier order concerning seized goods was distinct from later adjudication following investigation, notice under Section 74 and consideration of the taxpayer's reply, and therefore did not constitute parallel adjudication. In the absence of a jurisdictional infirmity, the petitioners were directed to pursue the statutory appeal, with writ-prosecution time excluded for limitation.

Notification No. 53/2023-Central Tax provides a special procedure for GST appeals filed beyond the ordinary limitation period where the appeal falls within the extended filing period and satisfies the prescribed payment condition. Its scope covers taxpayers unable to file within the statutory period, delayed appeals rejected as time-barred, and qualifying pending appeals arising from orders under sections 73 and 74. A qualifying appeal filed by 31 January 2024 cannot be treated less favourably than an appeal previously rejected solely for delay. Rejection without considering the Notification was treated as unsustainable, requiring remand for a merits determination.

Effective service of GST notices requires more than portal uploading where a taxpayer remains non-responsive despite repeated reminders. Although portal upload constitutes valid service, the assessing officer should consider other statutory modes, preferably registered post with acknowledgement due, to ensure actual communication before making an ex parte assessment. Failure to provide a meaningful opportunity of personal hearing can invalidate the assessment. The High Court set aside the ex parte assessment and lifted the consequential attachment, remanding the matter for fresh merits consideration subject to payment of 25% of the disputed tax. The taxpayer may file objections, and the officer must give clear 14 days' notice of personal hearing.

Cancellation of GST registration does not extinguish tax liability for periods preceding cancellation. High Court found that the taxpayer received the show-cause notice and statutory forms through the common portal and had repeated opportunities to respond and attend a personal hearing, but did not do so. No defect justified writ interference with the assessment order imposing tax and penalty. The writ petition was disposed of without interference, while preserving liberty to file a statutory appeal within the prescribed period on payment of the statutory pre-deposit.

Regular bail was granted to an accused alleged to have wrongfully utilised input tax credit through fictitious GST transactions. The alleged conduct was treated as punishable under Section 132 of the GST Act, described as a complete statutory regime for GST offences. Bail discretion was exercised after considering the maximum prescribed sentence, statutory availability of compounding, custody period, and the effect of continued detention on the applicant's business. Release remained subject to conditions designed to secure attendance and prevent interference with the investigation or trial.

Deduction under section 80-IAB extends to interest earned on unutilised business funds compulsorily placed in fixed deposits, including deposits made at the insistence of financial institutions, where the interest is treated as business income rather than income from other sources. Expenditure disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income earned. Accordingly, the deduction for qualifying fixed-deposit interest was upheld, and the disallowance relating to exempt income was restricted to the amount of exempt income.

Remittances received by an NRE account holder from non-resident relatives through banking channels, where NRE status and compliance with RBI guidelines are undisputed, were treated as exempt income not includible in total income. Funds credited to NRE accounts were regarded as beyond tax authorities' reach regarding their foreign source. Applying prior High Court rulings, the Tribunal's deletion of additions for unexplained investment and unexplained cash credits under sections 69 and 68 was sustained, and the Revenue's challenge was rejected because no substantial question of law arose.

Reassessment of an approved educational trust is unwarranted where, even after proposed disallowances, income applied to its objects remains above the 85% exemption threshold and no taxable income escapes assessment. The proviso to section 10(23C)(vi) permits accumulation of up to 15% of income, while section 152(2) permits reassessment proceedings to be dropped if the alleged escaped income does not reduce the assessed tax liability. Reopening and consequential reassessment were quashed. Revisionary power under section 264 may also modify, revoke or set aside an assessment made contrary to an interim court order, provided the resulting order is not prejudicial to the assessee; administrative system limitations do not excuse failure to remedy the breach.

Capital gains on an assessee's mortgaged immovable property are computed on the full sale consideration, less admitted deductions, even where a secured creditor sells the property in recovery proceedings and appropriates all proceeds toward another borrower's debt. Appreciation in the owner's property value triggers the charge; a distress sale under an enforceable mortgage or attachment does not alter the computation. The owner's non-receipt of proceeds does not remove liability where the mortgage was voluntarily created with knowledge of default consequences. The capital gains assessment therefore remains sustainable.