Author: inavatiq

PR No. 2026-2027/57; Dated: 09.04.2026

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued a discussion paper proposing enhanced safeguards in digital payments, aimed at mitigating fraud risks, particularly in Authorised Push Payment (APP) transactions.

1. Objective of the Proposal

The initiative seeks to:

• Strengthen fraud prevention mechanisms
• Protect vulnerable users
• Enhance trust and security in digital payments ecosystem

2. Key Proposed Safeguards

2.1 Time Lag for Certain APP Transfers

• Introduction of a cooling-off period for specific transactions
• Applicable to transfers to:

1. 1. Individuals
   2. Sole proprietorships
   3. Firms

• Aims to allow intervention in suspicious transactions

2.2 Additional Authentication for High-Value Transactions

• For vulnerable sections of society, such as senior citizens High-value transactions may require approval from a trusted person
• Adds an extra layer of security and oversight

2.3 Risk-Based Credit Controls

• Bank accounts may be allowed to receive credits commensurate with the nature of relationship with the bank
• Helps identify and restrict unusual or high-risk inflows

2.4 Customer-Induced Controls

Customers may be provided options to:

• Set transaction limits
• Enable additional security checks
• Restrict certain types of transactions

This empowers users to customise their own risk controls.

3. Regulatory Approach

• The proposals are part of a consultative discussion paper
• RBI is seeking feedback from stakeholders before finalising the framework

4. Conclusion

These proposed safeguards reflect RBI’s proactive approach towards strengthening digital payment security, balancing ease of transactions with enhanced fraud protection mechanisms in an increasingly digital financial ecosystem.

Click Here To Read The Full Press Release

The post RBI Proposes New Digital Payment Fraud Safeguards appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Tvl A J Power Center vs. Assistant Commissioner of ST Poonamallee Assessment [2026] 184 taxmann.com 691 (Madras)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• C. Saravanan, J.
• P. Rajkumar & Sreemannaarayana Mallela for the Petitioner.
• Mrs P.Selvi, Govt. Adv. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was subjected to inspection by the jurisdictional officer under Tamil Nadu GST Act, pursuant to which a statement was recorded and proceedings were initiated through issuance of DRC-01A proposing demand. Thereafter, a show cause notice (SCN) in Form GST REG-17 proposing the cancellation of the GST registration with retrospective effect and simultaneously suspending the registration. It was contended that such retrospective cancellation of registration from the inception date was legally unsustainable, and challenged the same by filing a writ petition. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the proposal in the SCN to cancel GST registration retrospectively with effect from 01-07-2017 was not sustainable in law under Section 29 of the CGST Act and Tamil Nadu GST Act read with Rule 22 of CGST Rules and Tamil Nadu GST Rules, as such retrospective cancellation could not be countenanced in the facts of the case. It was held that while the proceedings for cancellation could continue, the retrospective effect proposed in the SCN was liable to be quashed to that limited extent. Accordingly, the Court directed that upon compliance with such conditions and necessary facilitation on the GST portal, the petitioner’s registration was liable to be restored, thereby granting partial relief.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Center v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) [2022] 135 taxmann.com 234 (Madras)/[2022] 91 GST 77 (Madras)/[2022] 61 GSTL 515 (Madras)/(2022) 99 GSTR 386] (para 8) followed

List of Cases Referred to

• Tvl. Suguna Cutpiece Center v. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (ST) (GST) [2022] 135 taxmann.com 234 (Madras)/[2022] 91 GST 77 (Madras)/[2022] 61 GSTL 515 (Madras) (para 8).

The post HC Quashes Retrospective GST Registration Cancellation appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Nagpur Municipal Corporation vs. Bhimrao [2026] 184 taxmann.com 640 (HC-Bombay)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Rohit W. Joshi, J.
• J.B. Kasat, Adv. for the Petitioner.
• H.D. Dubey, S.G. Ingole & Syed Sufiyan, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the respondents were engaged by the petitioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation (NMC), as daily-wage/contractual workers between 1991 and 1996 and were subsequently regularised in 2006/2015.

They claimed that their pre-regularisation service should be counted for gratuity and pension, and that the date of completion of 240 days should be treated as the date of entry into service.

The Industrial Court declined retrospective permanency but directed that such a date be considered for the computation of pension and gratuity. The petitioner challenged the said direction.

It was noted that the service rendered as a daily-wage/contractual employee is liable to be counted towards pensionable service, even if not against a sanctioned post.

Further, it was noted that where salary for such period was paid from the contingency fund, only half of such service is to be counted as pensionable service, and if salary was not being paid from the contingency fund, the entire service rendered, as contractual employees, will have to be counted as pensionable service.

High Court Held

The High Court held that the NMC was to be directed to consider case of each complainant/respondent and in cases where total period of service rendered, including service rendered as daily wager, even against an unsanctioned post, was more than pensionable service, to compute amount of pension payable to all complainants who had superannuated from service and to make payment of pension to them as early as possible.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Subhash Sukhdev Sahare v. NMC Writ Petition No. 496 of 2023, dated 22-12-2025 (para 13)
• Purshuram Vithoba Bhandare v. State of Maharashtra 2001 (4) Mh.L.J. 587
• Shivappa v. State of Maharashtra 2005 (3) Mh.L.J. 709
• Waliuddin v. State of Maharashtra W. P. No. 1542 of 2008, dated 25-8-2010
• Syed Afzaluddin Ustad v. State of Maharashtra W. P. No. 815 of 2011, dated 24-8-2011
• State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sheela Devi [2023] 8 taxmann.com 1524 (SC)/2023 SCC OnLine SC 1272
• S.D. Jayaprakash v. Union of India [2025] 181 taxmann.com 182 (SC)/2025 SCC OnLine SC 973 (para 34) followed
• Narendra Shaligram Thakre v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation W. P. No. 643 of 1995, dated 22-3-2006 (para 13)
• Sanjay N. Revatkar v. Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Wardha W. P. No. 1533 of 2011, dated 7-10-2011 (para 31)
• Municipal Council v. Ramesh Haribhauji Wankhede 2024 SCC Online Bom 2127 (para 33) distinguished

List of Cases Referred to

• Subhash Sukhdev Sahare v. NMC [Writ Petition No. 496 of 2023, dated 22-12-2025] (para 8)
• Narendra Shaligram Thakre v. Nagpur Municipal Corporation [W. P. No. 643 of 1995, dated 22-3-2006] (para 12)
• Jagjeevan Jaikumar Sanghai v. Parbhani Municipal Corporation 2018(4) Mh.L.J. 947 (para 14)
• S.D. Jayaprakash v. Union of India [2025] 181 taxmann.com 182 (SC) (para 14)
• State of Himachal Pradesh v. Sheela Devi [2023] 8 taxmann.com 1524 (SC) (para 14)
• Municipal Council v. Ramesh Haribhauji Wankhede 2024 SCC Online Bom 2127 (para 15)
• Sanjay N. Revatkar v. Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Wardha [W. P. No. 1533 of 2011, dated 7-10-2011] (para 15)
• Purshuram Vithoba Bhandare v. State of Maharashtra 2001 (4) Mh.L.J. 587 (para 16)
• Shivappa v. State of Maharashtra 2005 (3) Mh.L.J. 709 (para 17)
• Waliuddin v. State of Maharashtra [W. P. No. 1542 of 2008, dated 25-8-2010] (para 22)
• Syed Afzaluddin Ustad v. State of Maharashtra [W. P. No. 815 of 2011, dated 24-8-2011] (para 23).

The post Daily Wage Service Counts for Pension Regardless of Sanctioned Post | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

CO.DPSS.ID.NO.S20/06-08-017/2026-2027; Dated: 09.04.2026

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued guidelines to streamline and expedite cross-border inward payments, aimed at improving efficiency and customer experience.

1. Immediate Intimation to Customers

Banks are required to:

• Inform customers immediately upon receipt of cross-border inward payment messages
• Ensure timely communication to enhance transparency and customer awareness

2. Handling of Messages After Operating Hours

• If inward payment messages are received after banking hours banks must notify customers at the start of the next business day

3. Implementation of Straight Through Processing (STP)

Banks must:

• Put in place Straight Through Processing (STP) systems
• Ensure automatic and prompt credit of inward payments to accounts of individual resident customers

4. Objective of the Guidelines

The measures aim to:

• Reduce processing delays in cross-border transactions
• Enhance operational efficiency
• Improve customer service and satisfaction

5. Conclusion

The RBI’s guidelines promote a faster, technology-driven payment ecosystem, ensuring timely credit and communication for cross-border inward remittances, thereby strengthening the overall customer experience.

Click Here To Read The Full Update

The post RBI Guidelines for Faster Cross-Border Inward Payments appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

PR No. 22/2026; Dated: 08.04.2026

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), in collaboration with the Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (IEPFA), organised the sixth ‘Niveshak Shivir’ under a proactive joint initiative in Bhubaneswar on 27th March 2026.

1. Objective of the Initiative

The ‘Niveshak Shivir’ aims to:

• Assist investors in reclaiming unpaid dividends and unclaimed shares
• Provide direct, on-ground support for resolving investor issues
• Enhance financial awareness and investor protection

2. Key Services Provided

The initiative facilitated a range of investor-centric services, including:

• Processing of claims relating to:

1. 1. Unpaid dividends
   2. Unclaimed shares pending for over 6–7 years

• On-the-spot KYC updates
• Nomination registration and updates
• Resolution of IEPFA-related claim issues

3. Direct Investor Facilitation

The Shivir enabled:

• Face-to-face interaction between investors and authorities
• Faster resolution of long-pending claims
• Simplified processes for compliance and documentation

4. Impact of the Initiative

This outreach programme strengthens:

• Investor confidence and protection
• Accessibility of regulatory support mechanisms
• Efficiency in addressing legacy and unclaimed investments

5. Conclusion

The ‘Niveshak Shivir’ reflects a proactive and investor-friendly approach by SEBI and IEPFA, ensuring that investors can recover their rightful dues with ease and transparency while promoting greater financial inclusion.

Click Here To Read The Full Press Release

The post SEBI and IEPFA Conducted the Sixth Niveshak Shivir in Bhubaneswar appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

PR No. 2026-2027/48; Dated: 08.04.2026

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued draft directions for the ‘Trade Receivables Discounting System (TReDS)’, proposing a comprehensive regulatory framework for platforms facilitating financing of trade receivables.

1. What is TReDS?

A Trade Receivables Discounting System (TReDS) is:

• A digital/electronic platform
• Designed to facilitate financing of trade receivables
• Enables factoring of receivables through multiple financiers

This helps improve liquidity for businesses, especially MSMEs.

2. Objective of the Draft Directions

The framework aims to:

• Strengthen the digital infrastructure for receivables financing
• Promote efficient and transparent financing mechanisms
• Enhance access to credit for suppliers and MSMEs

3. Key Areas Covered in the Draft

3.1 Authorisation of TReDS Platforms

• Specifies eligibility and approval requirements
• Entities must obtain authorisation from RBI to operate TReDS

3.2 Capital Requirements

• Prescribes minimum capital norms
• Ensures financial stability and operational resilience of platforms

3.3 Governance Framework

Establishes standards for:

• • Management structure
  • Board oversight
  • Risk management practices

3.4 Scope of Activities

Defines permissible activities, including:

• • Uploading and acceptance of invoices
  • Bidding by financiers
  • Discounting and settlement processes

3.5 Reporting Requirements

• Mandates periodic reporting to RBI
• Ensures transparency and regulatory monitoring

4. Conclusion

The draft directions aim to create a robust, transparent, and well-governed ecosystem for receivables financing, strengthening TReDS as a key enabler of working capital access and financial inclusion.

Click Here To Read The Full Press Release

The post RBI Issues Draft Directions for Trade Receivables Discounting System appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Press Release: 2026-2027/43, Dated 08.04.2026

Click Here To Read The Full Press Release

The post RBI Invites Comments on the Draft Consolidation of Supervisory Instructions to Reduce Compliance Burden appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Circular no. HO/49/(17)2026-CFD-POD2/I/8965/2026; Dated: 08.04.2026

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has introduced a mechanism for lock-in of pledged shares under the ICDR Regulations, aimed at easing compliance for issuers.

1. Objective of the Mechanism

The initiative seeks to:

• Facilitate compliance with lock-in requirements
• Address practical challenges in handling pledged shares during public issues
• Ensure regulatory clarity and operational ease

2. Framework Issued by Depositories

To operationalise the mechanism, depositories have prescribed a framework for issuers, which includes:

• Amendments to Articles of Association (AOA) – Incorporating provisions to enable lock-in of pledged shares
• Intimation to Stakeholders – Informing lenders/pledgees about the lock-in requirements
• Disclosures in Offer Documents – Providing clear disclosures regarding pledged shares and lock-in conditions

3. System and Process Enhancements

Depositories have:

• Made necessary changes to their systems and processes
• Enabled smooth implementation and tracking of locked-in pledged shares

4. Regulatory Impact

The framework ensures:

• Better alignment between pledge arrangements and lock-in norms
• Reduced operational complexity for issuers
• Enhanced transparency for investors

5. Conclusion

This mechanism reflects SEBI’s effort to modernise compliance processes, ensuring that pledged shares are seamlessly integrated within the lock-in framework, while maintaining investor protection and regulatory integrity.

Click Here To Read The Full Circular

The post SEBI Introduces a Mechanism for Lock-in of Pledged Shares Under ICDR Norms appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Press Release: 2026-2027/44, Dated 08.04.2026

Click Here To Read The Full Press Release

The post RBI Invites Comments on Draft Amendment Directions Reviewing IFR Norms appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Federal Bank Ltd. vs. Federal Bank Officers Association [2026] 185 taxmann.com 196 (HC-Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari & Syam Kumar V.M., JJ.
• C.U. Singh, Benny P. Thomas, Sr. Advs., Abel Tom Benny, D. Prem Kamath & Tom Thomas (Kakkuzhiyil), Advs. for the Appellant.
• P. Chidambaram, P. Ramakrishnan, Sr. Advs. & P.R. Ajith Kumar, CGC for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the appellant was a banking company governed by the Banking Regulation Act, with pan-India operations. The respondent was an officers’ association representing officers in Scales I to III and registered under the Trade Unions Act.

The Central Government, by Gazette Notification dated 5 June 2023, notified services engaged in the banking industry as a public utility service under Section 2(n) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

The respondent issued a call for a strike or work abstention in relation to employees/officers of the appellant bank. Following the strike call, the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) issued notices invoking Section 22, calling upon the respondent to participate in conciliation proceedings and restraining it from proceeding with the proposed strike/abstention.

Thereafter, the respondent filed a writ petition challenging the said notices. The Single Judge held that officers represented by the respondent did not fall within the definition of ‘workman’ under Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Further, an ‘industrial dispute’ under Section 2(k) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 required an employer–workman relationship; that Chapter V provisions applied to the workmen and employers; that a Conciliation Officer could act only when an industrial dispute existed or was apprehended; and that, since members were not workmen, Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 could not be invoked.

It was noted that Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, places a statutory embargo on “any person” and not only on “workmen”.

Further, it was noted that Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, applies even when the workers are not involved. In contrast, Section 23 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, applies only to disputes involving workers.

Also, it was noted that the right to collective bargaining by resorting to strikes or lockouts by employees of any establishment falls outside constitutional protections of Article 19(1)(c) of the Constitution of India.

High Court Held

The High Court observed that there was no basis for inference that managerial or supervisory employees of higher ranks or cadres were excluded from provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Further, the High Court observed that the restrictions imposed under Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, were intended to protect public interests and ensure the smooth operation of a PUS.

The High Court held that the very definition of ‘strike’ under Section 2(q) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, contemplates that officers and non-workmen employees are included within the expression “body of persons employed in any industry”. Therefore, the impugned order of the Single Judge was to be set aside.

List of Cases Referred to

• Narendra Kumar Sen v. All India Industrial Disputes (Labour Appellate) Tribunal AIR 1953 Bom 325 (para 6)
• Mukand Ltd. v. Mukand Staff & Officers’ Association 2004 taxmann.com 2985 (SC) (para 6)
• Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Management of Dimakuchi Tea Estate AIR 1958 SC 353 (para 6)
• T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu 2003 taxmann.com 4792 (SC) (para 17)
• Communist Party of India (M) v. Bharat Kumar [1998] 1997 taxmann.com 2114 (SC) (para 17.3)
• Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45 (para 17.3)
• All India Bank Employees’ Association v. National Industrial Tribunal (Bank Disputes), Bombay 1961 taxmann.com 83 (SC) (para 18)
• B.R. Singh v. Union of India (1989) 4 SCC 710 (para 20).

The post Section 22 Strike Curbs Apply to All Bank Staff | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source