Latest Blogs from SBS and Company LLP

    SBS Wiki E Journal December 2021

    In this edition, we bring you, one of the most complicated classifications under the income tax laws, that is, classification of lease income. Whether the same would be classified under income from house property or profits and gains from business or profession or income from other sources is a complicated issue and we tried to discuss on the same with the help of a case study.

    The next article is on the various issues under the residency under Section 6 of Income Tax Act. We have covered the most asked issues, whether the day of arrival is counted for purposes of computation of days present in India for determining the residential status and similar items.  

    I hope that you will have good time reading this edition and please do share your feedback. I will also urge clients to mail us topics or issues on which you want us to deliberate in our future editions, so that we can contribute to the same.

    Key Topics:


    Tags: ,
    SBS I 19th Edition

    Re-Opening of Assessment – Challenge before Delhi High Court

    As the legislature has permitted re-assessment to be made only in accordance with the substituted provisions, it can only be done in this manner, or not at all - Delhi High Court.


    During the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, in order to provide sufficient time to comply with various provisions under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘ITA’) and other laws, Central Government (‘CG’) has enacted Taxation and Other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 (‘TOLA, 20’)

    Tags: ,
    Beneficiary in Revocable Transfer vis-à-vis Resident in DTAA & Others - Bombay High Court in Abu Dhabi Investment Authority & Others

    The recent judgment of Bombay High Court in the matter of Abu Dhabi Investment Authority[1] is a judgment for many firsts. The judgment is a result of challenge of AAR[2] ruling in Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (for brevity ‘ADIA’).


    ADIA is a public institution owned by and subject to the supervision of Emirate of Abu Dhabi. ADIA has challenged the ruling passed by AAR, wherein the later denied inter-alia the benefit of India-UAE[3] DTAA[4] in respect of the income accruing to the investments made or proposed to be made by Green Maiden A 2013 Trust (‘Trust’), which was established by ADIA as settlor and Equity Trust (Jersey) Limited as the trustee (ETL/Trustee). ADIA has invested USD[5] 200 million in India on revocable basis through the above trust, wherein ETL acted as trustee with sole beneficiary as ADIA.

    Rectification of GSTR-3B - Supreme Court Decision in Bharti Airtel Limited

    The recent judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Union of India vs. Bharati Airtel Limited[1] deals with a special circumstance of rectification of Form GSTR-3B. As all of us are aware that Form GSTR-3B is a monthly/quarterly return in which the taxpayer assesses his liability and discharge the same by using the cash and credit. The matter before the Honourable Supreme Court is pertaining to the rectification of such return. Though the rectification of the said return is possible in a different methodology as proposed by Circular 26/26/2017-CT dated 29.12.17 by making changes in a different return, the respondent in the subject matter (Bharati Airtel Limited) wanted to carry such rectification in the same return, where the error has occurred. We shall proceed to examine as to how the matter was finally settled by the Honourable Supreme Court.

    SBS Wiki E Journal November 2021

    In this edition, we bring you, Part III of various shades of draft assessment orders and issue surrounding them. In this piece, we have dealt on the issues arising of the e-assessment and faceless assessment schemes.

    The next article is on the recent judgment of Honourable Supreme Court in the matter of Bharati Airtel Limited, wherein the judgment of Delhi High Court was struck down. The Supreme Court has asked right questions which the Delhi High Court failed to ask and stated that GSTR-2A is only a facilitator and non-availability of the same cannot be used at a later point of time to swap the entries. The Supreme Court upheld the Para 4 of Circular 26/26/2017 – CT since the same is within the ambit of Section 39(9) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Supreme Court has distinguished the various High Court judgments which have held that GSTR-3B is a stop-gap arrangement and not a return under Section 39 by relying on the amendment made to Section 39 and finally giving a sanctity to GSTR-3B as return.

    Tags: ,
    Looking for suggestions?

    Subscribe SBS AND COMPANY LLP updates via Email!