Cross-border trade plays a vital role in boosting a country’s economic growth. With accelerated globalization, we have observed India emerging as one of the major players in the global supply chain. In the past decade, there has been a substantial rise in cross-border transactions; both in terms of volume and value and this rise has revealed various statutory hurdles in the extant applicable laws governing cross-border trade.
The article discusses the recent circular which is issued by International Finance Services Centres Authority (‘IFSCA’) for imposing an obligation on Authorised FMEs, registered FMEs (Non-Retail) and Registered FMEs (Retail) to maintain a website or a webpage dedicated to their fund management activities in the IFSC.
The article discusses the conceptual foundations of the force of attraction rule, traces its judicial evolution in India, and evaluates the relevance of the doctrine in an era increasingly shaped by source-based taxation and digital nexus rules.
The notification of the Employees' Provident Funds Scheme, 2026 (‘2026 Scheme’) with effect from 1 July 2026, was anticipated to settle and provide clarity on the regulatory framework governing international workers under the Code on Social Security, 2020. However, it has done the opposite in one respect. The 2026 Scheme retains a dedicated framework for international workers and carries forward the substance of the erstwhile Paragraph 83 of the EPF Scheme, 1952 (‘1952 Scheme’) and Paragraph 43A of the EPS, 1995.
The article discusses a recent decision of the Supreme Court establishing that a plea for the withdrawal of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process can be allowed by the adjudicating authority even prior to the establishment of the committee of creditors. The author observes that the Supreme Court has not only addressed the existing gap in Section 12A of the IBC but it has also recognized the obligatory status of Regulation 30A.
Trade remedy measures are applicable only to specific products originating in certain countries. Sometimes exporters make changes in the business model to overcome the measures by circumventing the duties and thereby rendering the measures largely ineffective.
The article seeks to analyse the GST implications on leasing of capital goods between ‘distinct persons’, in the light of a recent ruling of the Maharashtra Appellate Authority of Advance Ruling. After providing the crisp summary of the Ruling, the article examines the implication of the Ruling in respect of issues regarding valuation, mere movement of goods not amounting to supply, and documentation.
The article discusses a recent decision of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court which has set aside an order passed by the Controller of Patents and Designs refusing the grant of patent for treatment of a plant disease, for being a method of agriculture under Section 3(h) of the Patents Act, 1970. The High Court in this regard noted that Sections 3(h) which bars the patenting of a method of agriculture or horticulture, does not contemplate treatment of plants
The Finance Act, 2021 substituted the provisions of reassessment under the Income-tax Act, 1961. Under the new reassessment provisions, the concept of ‘reason to believe’ has been substituted with ‘information’ which suggests that the income has escaped assessment. The article discusses the question as to whether such ‘information’ is required to be tested against the concept of ‘change of opinion’, as was required under the old reassessment provisions.
The WTO panel recently ruled against India’s import duty measures in relation to certain Information and Communication Technology (‘ICT’) goods, holding the measures as inconsistent with Articles II:1(a) and (b) of the GATT 1994. The article analyses the critical arguments raised by India to defend its position and the panel’s ruling thereon.
Revival of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (‘CIRP’) proceedings refers to the restoration of the already withdrawn CIRP by a creditor which generally happens upon the breach of the settlement agreement (‘Settlement Agreement’) pursuant to which the application for CIRP also gets withdrawn. In such circumstances, rather than filing for a fresh application for initiation of CIRP, the creditor may seek reviving of the earlier application.
The article discusses a recent decision of the Larger Bench of the CESTAT which settles, in favour of assessee, the issue as to whether Business Auxiliary Services (BAS) provided by Indian agents to foreign entities qualify as export of services under the service tax regime. The article in this regard also analyses whether this decision of the Larger Bench will have any impact in the GST regime.
The article discusses a recent decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Saraf Exports v. CIT, wherein the Apex Court has held that export incentives like Duty Drawback and DEPB will not qualify as first-degree nexus for the purposes of claim of deduction under Section 80-IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The decision has also reiterated the principle laid down earlier that restrictive meaning must be given to the expression ‘derived from’.
The article discusses the application of the Swissness Act, 2017 which regulates the use of Swiss symbols or labels, associating the products and services with Switzerland. Talking about the criteria for Swissness and the effect of the Act on the famous chocolate brand, the article notes that evocation is a huge factor when understanding consumer psychology. According to the author, while the Act does not refer to trademarks per se, it does find its basis in the concept of evocation.
When producers or exporters export goods to other countries, they most likely would have come across a trade barrier of some form or the other. While tariff walls have as such declined and non-tariff barriers have increased, importing countries continue to use trade remedial measures as a defense against imports. In fact, India and the United States are the leading users of trade remedial measures while imports from China are the major target of these trade remedial measures
Charitable entities set up for different charitable causes such as education, yoga, relief of poor, medical relief, advancement of any general public utility etc., receive a tax-exempt status under Section 10(23C) and Section 11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’). As per Section 11 of the Act, the trusts or charitable institutions are subject to following conditions to obtain tax exemption:
The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from advertising and soliciting work through communication in the public domain. This website is meant solely for the purpose of information and not for the purpose of advertising. Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan does not intend to solicit clients through this website. We do not take responsibility for decisions taken by the reader based solely on the information provided in the website. By clicking on 'ACCEPT', the visitor acknowledges that the information provided in the website (a) does not amount to advertising or solicitation and (b) is meant only for his/her understanding about our activities and who we are.
By continuing to use this site you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Cookie Policy.