My case is going to the Approving Panel. Who actually sits on it, what powers does it have over me, how long is its term, and can the six months it has to decide be extended?
The Approving Panel is not a departmental committee. By s.144BA(15) the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT constitutes one or more Panels, each of three members including a Chairperson, and by s.144BA(16) "the Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court", with one member from the Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax and one member "an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices". By s.144BA(19) the Panel has, in addition to its own powers, "the powers which are vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under section 245U". Its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three years (s.144BA(17)). The six-month period in s.144BA(13) is subject to an Explanation that excludes two things — time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A, capped at one year, and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court order or injunction — with a proviso that if fewer than sixty days remain after that exclusion, the period is extended to sixty days.
Decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) on 2018-04-01, reported as Section 144BA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, transcribed in full from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-1 (heading "Reference to Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2013); sub-sections (13) to (16) transcribed again from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-2 (heading "Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2014) and from /w/section-144ba-4 (Year: 2016), and sub-sections (17) to (21) from /w/section-144ba-3 (Year: 2015); corroborated at indiankanoon.org/doc/144999970/. It bears on section 144BA, section 144BA(9), section 144BA(13), section 144BA(14), section 144BA(15), section 144BA(16), section 144BA(17), section 144BA(18), section 144BA(19), section 144BA(20), section 144BA(21), section 245U, section 90, section 90A, section 95, section 96 of the Income Tax Act 1961, in Assessment & Scrutiny, Appeals and How Tax Law Is Read matters.
The composition matters because it is the answer to the instinctive objection that GAAR puts the department in charge of its own case. The Chairperson is or has been a High Court judge; the third member is neither a revenue officer nor a taxpayer's representative; and s.144BA(9) decides differences by majority, so the two non-Revenue members can outvote the Revenue member. That is worth saying to a client who is deciding whether to fight at the Panel or wait for a writ, because a Panel direction binds both sides under s.144BA(14) and carries no appeal, which makes the Panel hearing the last fact-finding forum in the case. The s.245U borrowing matters because the Panel is given, in addition to its own powers under this section, whatever powers s.245U vests in the Authority for Advance Rulings. I did not retrieve s.245U for this entry and do not state its contents here; read it before advising a client on what the Panel can compel, and prepare the evidence on the footing that the Panel's powers are wider than the section alone shows. The Explanation matters because the six-month period is often assumed to be an absolute outer limit that a stay will exhaust. It is not: a court stay is expressly excluded from the computation, so a taxpayer who obtains an interim order — as the Delhi High Court granted in the Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II matter on 17 December 2025 — preserves his position but does not run out the Panel's time. The one-year cap on the exchange-of-information exclusion is the taxpayer's protection against an indefinite treaty-information adjournment.
Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them.
Read aloud by your device. Press again to stop.
Section 144BA, sub-sections (15) to (21) and the Explanation, as transcribed from the departmental pages, read: "(15) The Central Government shall, for the purposes of this section, constitute one or more Approving Panels as may be necessary and each panel shall consist of three members including a Chairperson. (16) The Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court, and— (i) one member shall be a member of Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax; and (ii) one member shall be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices. (17) The term of the Approving Panel shall ordinarily be for one year and may be extended from time to time up to a period of three years. (18) The Chairperson and members of the Approving Panel shall meet, as and when required, to consider the references made to the panel and shall be paid such remuneration as may be prescribed. (19) In addition to the powers conferred on the Approving Panel under this section, it shall have the powers which are vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under section 245U. (20) The Board shall provide to the Approving Panel such officials as may be necessary for the efficient exercise of powers and discharge of functions of the Approving Panel under the Act. (21) The Board may make rules for the purposes of the constitution and efficient functioning of the Approving Panel and expeditious disposal of the references received under sub-section (4). Explanation.—In computing the period referred to in sub-section (13), the following shall be excluded— (i) the period commencing from the date on which the first direction is issued by the Approving Panel to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner for getting the inquiries conducted through the authority competent under an agreement referred to in section 90 or section 90A and ending with the date on which the information so requested is last received by the Approving Panel or one year, whichever is less; (ii) the period during which the proceeding of the Approving Panel is stayed by an order or injunction of any court: Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid time or period, the period available to the Approving Panel for issue of directions is less than sixty days, such remaining period shall be extended to sixty days and the aforesaid period of six months shall be deemed to have been extended accordingly." Sub-section (14), which is the appeal bar, reads: "(14) The directions issued by the Approving Panel under sub-section (6) shall be binding on— (i) the assessee; and (ii) the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner and the income-tax authorities subordinate to him, and notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of the Act, no appeal under the Act shall lie against such directions."
Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an Approving Panel is constituted by the Central Government and consists of three members including a Chairperson who is or has been a judge of a High Court, one Indian Revenue Service member not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, and one academic or scholar member; that its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three; that it has, in addition to its own powers, the powers vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under s.245U; that the Board provides it with officials and may make rules for its constitution and functioning; and that the six-month period in s.144BA(13) excludes time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A up to a maximum of one year and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court, with the remaining period extended to sixty days where less than sixty days would otherwise remain. The bar on appeal against a Panel direction is in sub-section (14).
Not a judgment; no judicial reasoning is stated for these sub-sections. The absence of any appeal was, however, given as the reason for entertaining a writ petition by the Bombay High Court at paragraph 3 of its order of 19 December 2025 in Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd v PCIT, and both the taxpayer and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax have filed writ petitions against a single Approving Panel order in the proceedings before the Delhi High Court in Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II Limited v Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3.
(16) The Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court, and— (i) one member shall be a member of Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax; and (ii) one member shall be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices.
Upload it and we will read it, work out your deadline and draft the reply. A CA reviews before anything is filed.
Handle my notice → Ask a CA on WhatsAppThe Approving Panel is not a departmental committee. By s.144BA(15) the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT constitutes one or more Panels, each of three members including a Chairperson, and by s.144BA(16) "the Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court", with one member from the Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax and one member "an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices". By s.144BA(19) the Panel has, in addition to its own powers, "the powers which are vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under section 245U". Its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three years (s.144BA(17)). The six-month period in s.144BA(13) is subject to an Explanation that excludes two things — time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A, capped at one year, and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court order or injunction — with a proviso that if fewer than sixty days remain after that exclusion, the period is extended to sixty days. This was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text) and bears on section 144BA, section 144BA(9), section 144BA(13), section 144BA(14), section 144BA(15), section 144BA(16), section 144BA(17), section 144BA(18), section 144BA(19), section 144BA(20), section 144BA(21), section 245U, section 90, section 90A, section 95, section 96 of the Income Tax Act 1961. It is reported as Section 144BA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, transcribed in full from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-1 (heading "Reference to Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2013); sub-sections (13) to (16) transcribed again from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-2 (heading "Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2014) and from /w/section-144ba-4 (Year: 2016), and sub-sections (17) to (21) from /w/section-144ba-3 (Year: 2015); corroborated at indiankanoon.org/doc/144999970/. The composition matters because it is the answer to the instinctive objection that GAAR puts the department in charge of its own case. The Chairperson is or has been a High Court judge; the third member is neither a revenue officer nor a taxpayer's representative; and s.144BA(9) decides differences by majority, so the two non-Revenue members can outvote the Revenue member. That is worth saying to a client who is deciding whether to fight at the Panel or wait for a writ, because a Panel direction binds both sides under s.144BA(14) and carries no appeal, which makes the Panel hearing the last fact-finding forum in the case. The s.245U borrowing matters because the Panel is given, in addition to its own powers under this section, whatever powers s.245U vests in the Authority for Advance Rulings. I did not retrieve s.245U for this entry and do not state its contents here; read it before advising a client on what the Panel can compel, and prepare the evidence on the footing that the Panel's powers are wider than the section alone shows. The Explanation matters because the six-month period is often assumed to be an absolute outer limit that a stay will exhaust. It is not: a court stay is expressly excluded from the computation, so a taxpayer who obtains an interim order — as the Delhi High Court granted in the Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II matter on 17 December 2025 — preserves his position but does not run out the Panel's time. The one-year cap on the exchange-of-information exclusion is the taxpayer's protection against an indefinite treaty-information adjournment. If it applies to you, the first step is this: Ask for the notification constituting the Panel that is to hear your case, and check that its term under s.144BA(17) had not expired when the reference was received. A Panel is constituted for one year, extendable to three.
Section 144BA, sub-sections (15) to (21) and the Explanation, as transcribed from the departmental pages, read: "(15) The Central Government shall, for the purposes of this section, constitute one or more Approving Panels as may be necessary and each panel shall consist of three members including a Chairperson. (16) The Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court, and— (i) one member shall be a member of Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax; and (ii) one member shall be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices. (17) The term of the Approving Panel shall ordinarily be for one year and may be extended from time to time up to a period of three years. (18) The Chairperson and members of the Approving Panel shall meet, as and when required, to consider the references made to the panel and shall be paid such remuneration as may be prescribed. (19) In addition to the powers conferred on the Approving Panel under this section, it shall have the powers which are vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under section 245U. (20) The Board shall provide to the Approving Panel such officials as may be necessary for the efficient exercise of powers and discharge of functions of the Approving Panel under the Act. (21) The Board may make rules for the purposes of the constitution and efficient functioning of the Approving Panel and expeditious disposal of the references received under sub-section (4). Explanation.—In computing the period referred to in sub-section (13), the following shall be excluded— (i) the period commencing from the date on which the first direction is issued by the Approving Panel to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner for getting the inquiries conducted through the authority competent under an agreement referred to in section 90 or section 90A and ending with the date on which the information so requested is last received by the Approving Panel or one year, whichever is less; (ii) the period during which the proceeding of the Approving Panel is stayed by an order or injunction of any court: Provided that where immediately after the exclusion of the aforesaid time or period, the period available to the Approving Panel for issue of directions is less than sixty days, such remaining period shall be extended to sixty days and the aforesaid period of six months shall be deemed to have been extended accordingly." Sub-section (14), which is the appeal bar, reads: "(14) The directions issued by the Approving Panel under sub-section (6) shall be binding on— (i) the assessee; and (ii) the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner and the income-tax authorities subordinate to him, and notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of the Act, no appeal under the Act shall lie against such directions." The matter was decided on 2018-04-01 by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions (Not applicable — statutory text). On those facts the CBDT Circulars & Instructions held as follows. Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an Approving Panel is constituted by the Central Government and consists of three members including a Chairperson who is or has been a judge of a High Court, one Indian Revenue Service member not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, and one academic or scholar member; that its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three; that it has, in addition to its own powers, the powers vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under s.245U; that the Board provides it with officials and may make rules for its constitution and functioning; and that the six-month period in s.144BA(13) excludes time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A up to a maximum of one year and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court, with the remaining period extended to sixty days where less than sixty days would otherwise remain. The bar on appeal against a Panel direction is in sub-section (14).
Not a judgment; no judicial reasoning is stated for these sub-sections. The absence of any appeal was, however, given as the reason for entertaining a writ petition by the Bombay High Court at paragraph 3 of its order of 19 December 2025 in Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd v PCIT, and both the taxpayer and the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax have filed writ petitions against a single Approving Panel order in the proceedings before the Delhi High Court in Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II Limited v Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3. In the words reproduced by the source cited on this page: "(16) The Chairperson of the Approving Panel shall be a person who is or has been a judge of a High Court, and— (i) one member shall be a member of Indian Revenue Service not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax; and (ii) one member shall be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters, such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices."
It was decided by the CBDT Circulars & Instructions on 2018-04-01 and is reported as Section 144BA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, transcribed in full from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-1 (heading "Reference to Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2013); sub-sections (13) to (16) transcribed again from incometaxindia.gov.in/w/section-144ba-2 (heading "Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases", Year: 2014) and from /w/section-144ba-4 (Year: 2016), and sub-sections (17) to (21) from /w/section-144ba-3 (Year: 2015); corroborated at indiankanoon.org/doc/144999970/. Binding on the department, not on the assessee or the courts. An assessee may rely on a circular that is beneficial to them. A CBDT circular or instruction binds officers of the department but not the assessee and not the courts. Where a circular helps you, you may hold the department to it. Where it hurts you, it cannot override the Act or a judgment. On section 144BA, section 144BA(9), section 144BA(13), section 144BA(14), section 144BA(15), section 144BA(16), section 144BA(17), section 144BA(18), section 144BA(19), section 144BA(20), section 144BA(21), section 245U, section 90, section 90A, section 95, section 96, the practical question is whether the facts of your own notice match the facts of this case closely enough for the same rule to apply.
It cuts both ways and is cited by both sides. Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an Approving Panel is constituted by the Central Government and consists of three members including a Chairperson who is or has been a judge of a High Court, one Indian Revenue Service member not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, and one academic or scholar member; that its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three; that it has, in addition to its own powers, the powers vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under s.245U; that the Board provides it with officials and may make rules for its constitution and functioning; and that the six-month period in s.144BA(13) excludes time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A up to a maximum of one year and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court, with the remaining period extended to sixty days where less than sixty days would otherwise remain. The bar on appeal against a Panel direction is in sub-section (14). It arises in Assessment & Scrutiny, Appeals and How Tax Law Is Read matters, on section 144BA, section 144BA(9), section 144BA(13), section 144BA(14), section 144BA(15), section 144BA(16), section 144BA(17), section 144BA(18), section 144BA(19), section 144BA(20), section 144BA(21), section 245U, section 90, section 90A, section 95, section 96 of the Income Tax Act 1961, and was decided by Not applicable — statutory text. Before relying on it, read the source linked on this page and check whether it has since been distinguished, overruled or overtaken by an amendment to the Income Tax Act. In practice the steps that follow from it are these. Check the composition against s.144BA(16) — a Chairperson who is or has been a High Court judge, an IRS member not below Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, and an academic or scholar member. A Panel that is not so composed is not the Panel the section describes. Prepare for the hearing as a final hearing on the facts. The direction binds you and the Commissioner by s.144BA(14) and no appeal lies against it, so anything not put to the Panel will have to be litigated by writ, where the court will not retry the facts. Compute the six-month period under s.144BA(13) from the end of the MONTH in which the reference was received, then add back any exchange-of-information period (capped at one year) and any period of court stay, and apply the sixty-day floor in the proviso. If you are seeking a stay of the Panel's proceedings, advise the client that the stay does not consume the Panel's time — the Explanation excludes it — so the stay buys a hearing, not a limitation defence.
Still good law. The text is current so far as I could establish: four departmental pages with "Year:" stamps of 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016 print the same twenty-one sub-sections and Explanation, with the two designation changes appearing from the 2014 page onwards, and indiankanoon's text of the section agrees. The Year 2016 page is the latest departmental page I located; suffixes above /w/section-144ba-4 were not probed, so a later version cannot be excluded on this evidence. The archived Year 2012 page prints an entirely different fifteen-sub-section version and must not be used. Whether the Approving Panel's directions can be challenged on grounds other than appeal is currently before two High Courts, and neither matter has been decided: see the entries in this batch on Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd v PCIT and Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II Limited v CIT. No source could be cited for that finding. Checking whether an authority still stands matters as much as knowing what it held: a decision may be overruled on one point and survive on another, or the provision it interprets may have been amended since. Read the source and the editor's note on this page before relying on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal.
SOURCING AND A DESIGNATION CHANGE. Section 144BA has four departmental pages carrying different "Year:" stamps, and they do not print the same words. /w/section-144ba (Year: 2012) prints the Finance Act 2012 version, which has only fifteen sub-sections, no appeal bar and a Board-constituted Panel of not less than three members drawn from income-tax authorities and the Indian Legal Service — that page is archived and must not be used. /w/section-144ba-1 (Year: 2013) prints the substituted twenty-one sub-section version with the Explanation, under the heading "Reference to Commissioner in certain cases". /w/section-144ba-2 (Year: 2014) prints the same version under the amended heading "Reference to Principal Commissioner or Commissioner in certain cases", with "Principal Commissioner or" inserted before "Commissioner" in sub-section (14)(ii) and "Principal Chief Commissioner or" inserted before "Chief Commissioner of Income-tax" in sub-section (16)(i), each carried by a footnote marker on the page. /w/section-144ba-3 (Year: 2015) and /w/section-144ba-4 (Year: 2016) print the same text again. The designations in this entry are therefore taken from the Year 2014, 2015 and 2016 pages, which are the later ones. Independently, indiankanoon's text of section 144BA at /doc/144999970/ prints those two substitutions in square brackets and attributes both to "Act 25 of 2014, section 4 ... (w.e.f. 1-6-2013)"; I did NOT verify that Act number, section number or date on a government page, and it is recorded here only as what that source states. I DID verify the point the reader is most likely to be given wrongly: the bar on appeal is in sub-section (14), not sub-section (13). Sub-section (13) is the six-month time limit; sub-section (14) makes the Panel's direction binding on the assessee and on the Commissioner and his subordinates and provides that "notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of the Act, no appeal under the Act shall lie against such directions". That was confirmed on four departmental pages (Years 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016) and on indiankanoon. `decided_on` is 2018-04-01, which is NOT the commencement of the section: it is the first day of the first assessment year to which s.95(2) applies the Chapter this section serves. Sub-sections (1) to (14) are already covered by the existing entry in this library on the GAAR procedure; this entry deals with the constitution and powers of the Panel and with the Explanation. The Explanation carries the same designation change as sub-sections (14) and (16): the Year 2014 and later departmental pages print "Principal Commissioner or" before "Commissioner" in clause (i) of the Explanation, carried by footnote marker 48a, and the text here follows those later pages. Section 245U, whose powers sub-section (19) borrows, was not retrieved on this pass and its contents are not stated in this entry. This library shows the verification state of every entry openly. This entry has not yet been read in full by a chartered accountant. The summary reflects the sources listed on this page. Read the source before you rely on it in a reply to an Assessing Officer or in an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
Not a judgment. The statutory position is that an Approving Panel is constituted by the Central Government and consists of three members including a Chairperson who is or has been a judge of a High Court, one Indian Revenue Service member not below the rank of Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner, and one academic or scholar member; that its term is ordinarily one year, extendable up to three; that it has, in addition to its own powers, the powers vested in the Authority for Advance Rulings under s.245U; that the Board provides it with officials and may make rules for its constitution and functioning; and that the six-month period in s.144BA(13) excludes time taken on an exchange-of-information reference under s.90 or s.90A up to a maximum of one year and any period during which the Panel's proceeding is stayed by a court, with the remaining period extended to sixty days where less than sixty days would otherwise remain. The bar on appeal against a Panel direction is in sub-section (14).
Every entry in this library links to where it was found, so you can check it yourself rather than take our word for it.
I hold a Mauritius TRC. Can the department still deny me treaty relief on the capital gains?
Our Indian affiliate is paid at arm's length. Can more profit still be attributed to a PE?
The AO invoked GAAR even though a specific anti-avoidance section covers my transaction. Can he do that?
We paid for technical services but learnt nothing from them. Is it still fees for technical services?