Section 96(2)

Section 96(2) — the law in short

What the courts have decided on section 96(2), in one screen. Read this first; open an entry when you need the facts, the reasoning and the source.

• AAR v Tiger Global International II Holdings Supreme CourtHelps departmentValidity unconfirmed
  I hold a Mauritius TRC. Can the department still deny me treaty relief on the capital gains?
  Yes. A Tax Residency Certificate is a necessary eligibility requirement under s.90(4) but is not sufficient or conclusive evidence of residence, beneficial ownership or entitlement to treaty benefits, and the authorities may examine the substance of the arrangement. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment, restored the AAR's rejection and held the gains taxable in India.
• Ayodhya Rami Reddy Alla v PCIT High CourtHelps departmentUnder appeal
  The AO invoked GAAR even though a specific anti-avoidance section covers my transaction. Can he do that?
  Yes, on this ruling. Chapter X-A is not shut out because a specific anti-avoidance rule occupies part of the field: s.95(1) opens with a non-obstante clause, which displaces the usual presumption that the special provision excludes the general one, so GAAR can supersede a SAAR. The Court also refused to interfere at the initiation stage because s.144BA gives the assessee a reference to the Principal Commissioner and the Approving Panel.

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.