EP01: BEPS 2.0 - Pillar 1 And Pillar 2 Framework And G7 (Podcast)

A comprehensive guide to GST refunds for exporters covering zero-rated supplies, ITC refunds, IGST, LUT/Bond, export of services, and GST compliance.

Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’) is governed by the fundamental rule that an assessee is required to pay only such tax as is lawfully due; the principle emanates from the mandate of Article 265 of the Constitution of India which provides that no tax can be recovered/ retained contrary to the provisions of the statute. This legal doctrine has found repeated acceptance and reiteration by the Apex Court in cases such as Mafatlal Industries and Shelly Products.

Supreme Court holds that, by virtue of omission of rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (CGST Rules) (which restricted assessees availing benefit of certain duty exemption schemes on import of goods, from undertaking export on payment of IGST and claiming refund thereof), all pending proceedings shall stand concluded; observes that the rule resulted in unnecessary complications and its omission must not result in such complications being kept alive, insofar as the pending proceedings were concerned.

The Supreme Court has established critical procedural requirements for arrests under the CGST Act, mandating that orders under Section 69 must be communicated to the accused before arrest to protect their right to seek anticipatory bail. This landmark ruling addresses the balance between investigative powers and fundamental rights to liberty, while also clarifying limitations on interim relief when pre-arrest bail petitions are dismissed as non-maintainable.

Hon’ble Mumbai Tribunal holds that where the sale consideration for unquoted shares exceeds the Rule 11UA FMV, the AO cannot substitute the actual consideration with a higher value derived from asubsequent independent strategic transaction.

In Aerocom Cushions Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner (Anti-Evasion), CGST & CX, Nagpur-1, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court quashed a Show Cause Notice demanding Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) on the assignment of leasehold rights in an industrial plot allotted by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (“MIDC”). The Court held that such an assignment constitutes a transfer of benefits arising out of immovable property and does not amount to a “supply of service” under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”).

India’s Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Infrastructure Investment Trusts (InvITs) were designed as tax-efficient ways to invest in income-producing assets through a regulated, transparent structure. That promise remains, but three successive legislative reforms between 2023 and 2026 have changed the tax structure for these business trusts and their investors.

India’s abolition of angel tax has removed one significant tax risk from startup fundraising. But valuation, Companies Act, FEMA and legacy tax compliance obligations continue to matter.

Alternative investment funds (“AIFs”) are privately pooled investment vehicles which raise funds and invest in accordance with a defined investment policy for the benefit of the investors. AIFs established and operating within India (except in the Gujarat International Finance Tec-City (“GIFT City”)) are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Board of India (“SEBI”) under the SEBI (Alternative Investment Funds) Regulations, 2012, as amended (“AIF Regulations”), which allow AIFs to be structured as a trust, a limited liability partnership (“LLP”), a company, or a body corporate.

Receiving an income tax notice can be unsettling, especially when it demands additional tax, disallows a claimed deduction, or alleges a discrepancy in your filed return. Many taxpayers assume that once a notice is issued, they have no choice but to comply.