Tax Monthly Digest: January 2025

SUPREME COURTMotor Accident Claims - Tax Returns Can Be Accepted To Determine Income Only If They Are Appropriately Produced : Supreme CourtCase name: New India Assurance Co. Ltd. V. Sonigra Juhi Uttamchand.Case no.: SLP (C) No. 30491 of 2018The Supreme Court, recently (on January 02), while deciding a motor accident compensation claim case, observed that monthly income could be fixed after taking into account the tax returns. However, the details of tax payment must be properly brought into evidence to enable the Tribunal/Court to calculate the income. The Bench of Justices C.T Ravikumar and Sanjay Karol were deciding a batch of appeals preferred both by the insurer and the claimant. While the claimant prayed for the enhancement of compensation, the insurer pleaded for the reduction.Reduction In Share Capital Amounts To Transfer Of Capital Asset Under Income Tax Act : Supreme CourtCase Name: PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4 & ANR v. M/S. JUPITER CAPITAL PVT. LTD.Case no.: SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NO. 63 OF 2025The Supreme Court (recently on January 02) reiterated that reduction in share capital is covered under Section 2(47) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which talks about transfer of a capital asset. It explained that such reduction would come under the expression “sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset” used in the provision.The Bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan said that this provision provides an inclusive definition of transfer, covering relinquishment of an asset or extinguishment of any right.'Will Pull You Up' : Supreme Court Asks GST Department To Rectify Issues Over Fake Invoices, Asks How Genuine Purchasers Are LiableThe Supreme Court on Wednesday flagged a recurring problem in GST matters whereby genuine purchasers who paid Goods and Services Tax (GST) face issues because their suppliers raised fictitious bills to evade crediting the GST to the department.The Court orally wondered how could the purchaser be held liable for the incorrect GST registration of the suppliers when they have genuinely made purchases and paid the money, including the GST amount.Supreme Court Sets Aside Excise Duty Demand On Oil Marketing Companies For Inter-Supply Of Petroleum ProductsCase Title: Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. versus Commissioner of Central Excise Nashik Commissionerate (and connected matters)Case no.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5642 OF 2009In a significant relief for Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs), the Supreme Court ruled (Jan. 20) that prices under the MoU for inter-supply of petroleum products, designed to ensure smooth nationwide distribution, do not constitute "transaction value" and are exempt from excise duty due to their non-commercial nature.The Court emphasised that the inter-supply arrangement was not solely price-driven but aimed at facilitating seamless distribution, rendering it ineligible for excise duty.'Badly Drafted Petition' : Supreme Court Dismisses PIL Challenging TDS System Of Income Tax ActCase title: Ashwini Upadhyay v Union of IndiaCase no.: W.P.(C) No. 20/2025The Supreme Court today (January 24) refused to entertain a Public Interest Litigation challenging the provisions of the Income Tax Act which impose an obligation on private employers to deduct tax at source (TDS) on the salaries paid by them.A bench comprising Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar said that the petition filed by BJP leader Ashwini Upadhyay was "badly drafted" and asked him to approach the High Court.HIGH COURTSAllahabad HC[GST] Decision-Making Procedure Adopted By Authority De Hors Provisions Of Act/Rules, Is Liable To Be Rendered As Flawed: Allahabad High CourtCase Title: M/S Akriti Food Industry Llp v. State Of UP And 3 Others Case no.: [WRIT TAX No. - 2070 of 2024]While directing that the order under Section 73 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 uploaded in the “Additional Notices and Tabs” on the GST portal be treated as the show cause notice, the Allahabad High Court observed,“If in a decision making procedure adopted by the authority is de hors the provisions of the act or rules framed thereunder, it is liable to be rendered as flawed one.”[Income Tax] Allahabad HC To Examine Whether Proceedings U/S 148A(b) Initiated Prior To 01.09.2024 Would Be Saved After Enforcement Of The Finance (No.2) Act, 2024Case Title: Ravish Rastogi v. Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Finance New Delhi And 3 OthersCase no.: WRIT TAX No. - 359 of 2024The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has sought state response on the question of maintainability of proceedings under Section 148A(b) of the Income Tax Act initiated prior to 01.09.2024, if at all, would be saved after enforcement of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2024 w.e.f. 01.09.2024 especially in view of sub-Section- (4) of Section 152 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which has been inserted by the said Finance (No.2) Act, 2024.Andhra Pradesh HCSupply Of Solar Generating Power Station Is A Composite Supply, Would Not Amount ...

Tax Monthly Digest: January 2025

Kapil Dhyani

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tax Monthly Digest: January 2025

Kapil Dhyani

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers