What the courts have decided on section 144BA(14), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.
-
Hinduja Global Solutions Ltd v PCIT — Chapter X-A invoked on an NCLT-sanctioned demerger: Rule issued because no appeal lies, and the s.144BA reference, the directions and the assessments stayed
High CourtHelps taxpayerValidity unconfirmed
The department has invoked GAAR on a demerger that the NCLT sanctioned after notice to the income-tax authorities, and s.72A(4) expressly allowed the loss to move with the undertaking. I have no right of appeal against the reference or the directions. What can I actually do?
You go to the High Court under Article 226, and the Bombay High Court has said in terms that the absence of an appeal is itself a reason to entertain the writ. On 19 December 2025 it issued Rule on a petition challenging a s.144BA reference dated 31 March 2025 and directions dated 30 October 2025 invoking Chapter X-A on an NCLT-sanctioned demerger, recording that it was "mindful of the fact that there is no provisions for an Appeal for impugning the reference ... or the directions ... invoking the provisions of Chapter X-A of the IT Act". It found a strong prima facie case and granted interim relief staying the reference, the directions and the assessment proceedings for AYs 2022-23 and 2023-24. Two arguments carried that interim finding: that Chapter X-A could never have been invoked once a competent authority, the NCLT, had sanctioned the demerger after notice to the income-tax authorities who raised no objection; and that s.72A(4) expressly permits the transfer of accumulated loss and unabsorbed depreciation of the demerged undertaking, so that what the Act itself allows cannot be an impermissible avoidance arrangement.
-
Vedanta Holdings Mauritius II Ltd v CIT (International Taxation)-3 — an Approving Panel order under GAAR stayed by the Delhi High Court, with the Revenue filing its own writ against the same order
High CourtHelps taxpayerValidity unconfirmed
The Approving Panel has issued its order and s.144BA(14) says no appeal lies. Will a High Court actually stay a Panel order, and does the same bar stop the department from challenging a Panel order it dislikes?
It will entertain the writ, and on this occasion it stayed the Panel's order — but by consent, not on a contested application. On 17 December 2025 the Delhi High Court issued notice in two writ petitions directed against a single order of the Approving Panel dated 28 November 2025 under the General Anti Avoidance Rule, by which the reference made by the Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)-3, New Delhi under s.144BA(4) dated 26 May 2025 had been upheld; and it directed that "In the meantime, by concurrence of ld. Counsels, the impugned order and the consequent assessment proceedings shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing" — the stay was therefore made on the concurrence of counsel on both sides, and the order is not authority that a contested stay would be granted. The striking feature is who filed the second petition: W.P.(C) 19105/2025 was filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, International Tax Circle 3(1)(1), Delhi against the same Panel order. Because s.144BA(14) binds "the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner and the income-tax authorities subordinate to him" as well as the assessee, and bars any appeal under the Act, the department is in the same position as the taxpayer: if it wants to impugn a Panel direction it must also go by writ.
-
Statutory position — Rules 10UD, 10UE and 10UF: the Approving Panel stage — Form 3CEIA, four sets, circulation within seven days, and the notice of hearing to both sides
CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both ways
The Commissioner has referred my case to the Approving Panel. What form does that reference take, what is the Panel obliged to do with it, and am I entitled to be heard?
Three rules govern this stage and they are short. Rule 10UD requires the reference under s.144BA(4) to be "made in Form No. 3CEIA along with a copy of Form No. 3CEI and such other documents which the Principal Commissioner or the Commissioner deems fit" and to be "submitted in four sets, either in Hindi or English". Rule 10UE(1) requires the Chairperson of the Panel to cause the reference to be circulated among the other members "within seven days from the date of receipt of such reference". Rule 10UE(2) requires the Chairperson to "cause to be issued the notice to the Assessing Officer and the assessee affording an opportunity of being heard specifying therein the date and place of hearing" — so the taxpayer's right to be heard before the Panel is in the rules as well as in s.144BA(7). Rule 10UE(3) leaves the venue of the Panel's meetings to the Panel. Rule 10UF fixes the members' remuneration at a sitting fee of six thousand rupees per day plus travelling and daily allowances as admissible to an officer of the rank of Special Secretary to the Government of India, met from the budgetary grants of the Department of Revenue.
-
Statutory position — the GAAR procedure: section 144BA, Rules 10UB and 10UC, and the Approving Panel whose direction binds both sides
CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both ways
My client has received a notice under Chapter X-A saying his arrangement may be an impermissible avoidance arrangement. What is the procedure from here, who actually decides, and can I appeal the decision?
GAAR cannot be applied by the Assessing Officer on his own. He must refer the matter to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner under s.144BA(1) in Form No. 3CEG after first putting a written notice to the assessee under Rule 10UB(1); the Principal Commissioner then issues his own notice under s.144BA(2) giving the assessee up to sixty days to object and a hearing, and either drops the matter in Form No. 3CEH or refers it to the Approving Panel in Form No. 3CEI. The Approving Panel's direction under s.144BA(6) is binding on the assessee and on the Commissioner and his subordinates, and s.144BA(14) bars any appeal under the Act against that direction — the only route against it is a writ.
-
Statutory position — s.144BA(15) to (21) and the Explanation: who sits on the Approving Panel, the powers it borrows from the Advance Rulings Authority, and the two things that stop its six-month clock
CBDT Circulars & InstructionsCuts both ways
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.
Listed strongest first: Supreme Court, then High Court, then Tribunal, then CBDT. Nothing here has yet been read in full by a chartered accountant — open an entry to see where it came from.