Editorial Team – [2026] 187 taxmann.com 207 (Article)

Global Financial Insights is a weekly feature for the Accounts and Audit Module subscribers of Taxmann.com. It provides you with the latest updates on financial reporting and auditing practices from across the globe. Here is this week’s financial update:

1. IFRS Foundation Proposes Updates to IFRS Accounting Taxonomy 2025

The IFRS Foundation has released a proposed update to the IFRS Accounting Taxonomy 2025 aimed at improving the clarity, consistency and usability of digitally tagged financial reporting. The proposals focus on refining narrative elements, including text and text block disclosures, to support more accurate and efficient tagging.

Key changes include categorising narrative elements by intended use, simplifying taxonomy structures, and improving labels and classifications. The proposed enhancements have been developed in response to stakeholder feedback and are intended to reduce tagging errors and improve the quality of digital financial disclosures.

Source – IFRS Foundation

2. FRC Seeks Stakeholders’ Feedback on Amendments Relating to the Use of an Auditor’s Expert

The FRC has launched a consultation on proposed amendments to ISA (UK) 620 and ISAE (UK) 3000 to align UK auditing and assurance standards with recent international developments. The proposals seek to clarify practitioners’ responsibilities when using external experts, including assessing their competence, capabilities and objectivity. The amendments reflect recent changes to the IESBA Code of Ethics and corresponding updates issued by the IAASB, helping maintain consistency between UK and international standards. Stakeholders can submit comments on the proposals until 10th July 2026.

Source – Financial Reporting Council

3. PCAOB Establishes the Inspections Modernisation Council to Enhance Future Audit Oversight

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) has announced the formation of the Inspections Modernisation Council, a new advisory body intended to support the modernisation of the PCAOB’s inspection program and ensure its continued effectiveness in an evolving audit environment.

Since its establishment more than two decades ago, the PCAOB’s inspection program has played a key role in promoting audit quality and strengthening investor confidence. Recognising the changing nature of financial reporting, technology and capital markets, the PCAOB believes that further modernisation can help ensure inspections remain relevant, effective and responsive to emerging challenges.

To support this initiative, the PCAOB is seeking participation from a broad range of stakeholders with expertise in capital markets and familiarity with the inspection process. The Board has invited applications from investors, audit committee members, corporate finance executives, academics, technology specialists, regulators and practitioners from accounting firms of different sizes.

The Council is expected to provide diverse perspectives and practical insights that can assist the PCAOB in evaluating potential enhancements to its inspection framework. Through collaboration with external experts, the Board aims to identify opportunities to improve audit quality and strengthen the effectiveness of regulatory oversight.

The PCAOB has opened applications for membership of the Council, with the application period remaining open until 15 th June 2026.

Source – Public Company Accounting Oversight Board

Click Here To Read The Full Article

The post [Global Financial Insights] IFRS Taxonomy Update | FRC Consultation | PCAOB Reforms appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Sai Auto Mobiles vs. Commissioner Central Goods Service Tax and Central Excise [2026] 187 taxmann.com 74 (Allahabad)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Saumitra Dayal Singh & Vivek Saran, JJ.
• Astha Misra & Avneesh Tripathi, Counsels for the Petitioner.
• Dhananjay Awasthi, Counsel for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner challenged an adjudication order passed under the GST law on the ground that although the show cause notice was based on various relied-upon documents (RUDs), copies of such documents were never supplied before confirmation of demand. It was contended that in the absence of the relied-upon material, the petitioner was deprived of an effective opportunity to defend itself. The Revenue was unable to establish before the Court that copies of the relied-upon documents had been furnished to the petitioner prior to adjudication. The matter was accordingly placed before the Allahabad High Court.

High Court Held

The High Court held that where a demand is proposed on the basis of relied-upon documents, supply of such documents is ordinarily mandatory before the demand is confirmed. It observed that the Revenue had failed to establish that copies of the relied-upon documents had been supplied to the petitioner despite specific pleadings to that effect. The Court further observed that denial of such material adversely affected the petitioner’s right to effectively respond to the allegations. Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority with directions to furnish the relied-upon documents and proceed afresh after granting adequate opportunity, including opportunity of cross-examination wherever statements are relied upon. The writ petition was accordingly disposed of in favour of the assesse

The post HC Sets Aside GST Demand for Non-Supply of Relied-Upon Documents appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Master Circular no. HO/19/34/11(6)2025-AFD-POD1/I/12928/2026; Dated: 03.06.2026

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has issued an updated Master Circular for Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) to consolidate the regulatory framework applicable to AIFs into a single reference document.

The updated circular incorporates regulatory requirements contained in various circulars and directions issued up to 31 May 2026, thereby providing stakeholders with a comprehensive and easily accessible compliance framework.

1. Consolidation of Regulatory Requirements

The Master Circular has been issued to enable AIF stakeholders to access all applicable regulatory requirements in one place.

It consolidates and harmonises various circulars, guidelines and directions issued by SEBI over time, reducing the need to refer to multiple regulatory documents.

2. Circulars Issued Till 31 May 2026 Incorporated

The updated Master Circular incorporates the provisions of all relevant SEBI circulars issued up to 31 May 2026 relating to Alternative Investment Funds.

As a result, AIFs, investment managers, sponsors, trustees, custodians and other stakeholders can refer to a single consolidated document for regulatory compliance purposes.

3. Supersedes the earlier Master Circular of May 7, 2024

The newly issued Master Circular supersedes the earlier:

Master Circular for Alternative Investment Funds dated 07 May 2024

Accordingly, the updated Master Circular shall serve as the primary consolidated reference document for the AIF regulatory framework.

4. Incorporation of Subsequent Guidelines and Directions

Following the issuance of the Master Circular dated 07 May 2024, SEBI had issued various:

• Circulars;
• Guidelines;
• Directions; and
• Regulatory communications

applicable to Alternative Investment Funds.

These subsequent regulatory requirements have now been incorporated into the updated Master Circular to ensure completeness and regulatory consistency.

5. Benefits for AIF Stakeholders

The consolidated framework is expected to:

• Improve ease of compliance;
• Reduce regulatory fragmentation;
• Provide greater clarity on applicable requirements;
• Facilitate efficient implementation of SEBI regulations; and
• Serve as a single-point reference for market participants.

6. Applicability

The updated Master Circular applies to:

• Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs);
• Investment Managers;
• Sponsors;
• Trustees;
• Custodians; and
• Other entities governed by the SEBI AIF framework.

Stakeholders are required to comply with the provisions consolidated in the Master Circular.

7. Objective of the Master Circular

The primary objective of the updated Master Circular is to streamline regulatory compliance by consolidating all applicable instructions, circulars and directions relating to Alternative Investment Funds into a single document.

By providing a unified regulatory reference, SEBI aims to enhance transparency, improve regulatory certainty and facilitate smoother compliance across the Alternative Investment Fund ecosystem.

Click Here To Read The Full Circular

The post SEBI Issues Updated Master Circular for Alternative Investment Funds appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Notification F. No. IBBI/2026-27/GN/REG144, Dated 01.06.2026

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) has amended the IBBI (Grievance and Complaint Handling Procedure) Regulations, 2017 to streamline the framework for addressing grievances and complaints under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC).

The amendments seek to align regulatory provisions with the Code and introduce greater procedural flexibility in complaint handling.

1. Definition of “Service Provider” Aligned With the IBC

The amended regulations align the definition of “service provider” with Section 3(31A) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.

This amendment ensures consistency between the grievance and complaint handling framework and the statutory definitions prescribed under the Code.

2. Complaint Filing Form to Be Notified by the Board

A key procedural amendment replaces the prescribed complaint filing form contained in the Regulations with a framework under which the relevant format shall be:

• Notified separately by the IBBI; and
• Updated from time to time as required

This change enables the Board to revise procedural formats more efficiently without undertaking formal amendments to the Regulations.

3. Form A Omitted From the Regulations

The amendments also omit Form A from the existing regulations.

The omission forms part of the broader shift towards a flexible format-notification mechanism, allowing the Board to prescribe and update complaint-filing requirements through separate notifications or circulars.

4. Greater Procedural Flexibility in Complaint Handling

By moving away from rigid statutory forms and adopting Board-notified formats, the amended framework provides greater flexibility in:

• Filing of grievances and complaints;
• Updating procedural requirements;
• Improving administrative efficiency; and
• Responding to evolving regulatory and operational needs.

5. Objective of the Amendments

The amendments aim to strengthen and streamline the grievance and complaint handling mechanism under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code.

By aligning key definitions with the Code and introducing a more flexible framework for complaint-filing formats, IBBI seeks to improve regulatory efficiency, simplify procedural compliance, and enhance the effectiveness of grievance redressal and complaint management processes within the insolvency ecosystem.

Click Here To Read The Full Notification

The post IBBI Streamlines Grievance and Complaint Handling Under IBC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Circular No. IBBI/IIRP/98/2026; dated: 02.06.2026

Click Here To Read The Full Circular

The post IBBI Issues Updated Forms to Simplify Insolvency Compliance appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Yoginder Sharma vs. Management of Aravali Leasing Ltd. [2026] 186 taxmann.com 589 (HC-Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• V. Kameswar Rao & Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, JJ.
• H. K. Chaturvedi, Sagar Chaturvedi & Mrs Anjali Chaturvedi, Advs. for the Appellant.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the appellant-workman was terminated by the respondent/management for alleged misconduct, i.e., refusal to comply with instructions to collect payments from customers, which was stated to be part of his routine duties.

The appellant asserted a violation of the principles of natural justice due to the absence of a domestic inquiry prior to termination. In an industrial dispute, the respondent/management examined witnesses who were cross-examined on behalf of the appellant, and on appraisal of the evidence, the Labour Court held that the charge stood proved and passed an award upholding termination.

In the writ petition, the appellant reiterated the plea of violation of natural justice; the single judge rejected the submissions and dismissed the writ petition, affirming the Labour Court’s award.

It was noted that, since the respondent/management had examined witnesses and proved the charge against the appellant before the Labour Court, the plea that the termination violated the principles of natural justice was clearly unsustainable.

Further, it was noted that since part of the duty of the appellant was to collect money from the company’s clients and the appellant’s refusal to obey orders given by the respondent/management, depicted insubordination on the part of the appellant, the penalty of termination would be justified.

High Court Held

The High Court held that since the judgment of the Supreme Court covered the issue in the case of R. Thiruvirkolam v. Presiding Officer (1997) 1 SCC 9, the appellant was not entitled to back wages by treating dismissal as effective from the date of the award of the Labour Court instead of the date of dismissal. Thus, Single Judge was justified in dismissing writ petition.

List of Cases Reviewed

• R. Thiruvirkolam v. Presiding Officer [1997] 1996 taxmann.com 1744 (SC)/(1997) 1 Supreme Court Cases 9 (para 11) followed

List of Cases Referred to

• R. Thiruvirkolam v. Presiding Officer [1997] 1996 taxmann.com 1744 (SC) (para 11).

The post Termination for Insubordination Upheld Despite Absence of Domestic Inquiry appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

RBI/2026-27/96 FIDD.CO.LBS.BC.NO.02/02.08.001/2026-27, dated 03.06.2026

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has designated Canara Bank as the Lead Bank for the newly created Bajali district in Assam.

The RBI has also assigned the district a new District Working Code (DWC) – 01O for administrative and banking coordination purposes.

1. Canara Bank Appointed as Lead Bank

Under the revised Lead Bank arrangements, Canara Bank will be responsible for discharging the Lead Bank’s functions in the Bajali district.

As the Lead Bank, Canara Bank will coordinate banking and financial inclusion activities in the district in accordance with the Lead Bank Scheme.

2. District Working Code Assigned

The RBI has assigned District Working Code (DWC) 01O to the newly created Bajali district.

The code will be used for banking administration, reporting and coordination under the Lead Bank framework.

3. Role of the Lead Bank

Under the Lead Bank Scheme, the designated Lead Bank is responsible for:

• Coordinating banking activities in the district;
• Monitoring implementation of financial inclusion initiatives;
• Facilitating credit planning and banking development;
• Coordinating with government departments and financial institutions; and
• Supporting the implementation of priority sectors and developmental programmes.

The appointment ensures effective banking administration in the newly created district.

4. No Change in Lead Bank Arrangements for Other Districts

The RBI has clarified that the Lead Bank arrangements for all other districts across the country shall remain unchanged.

The present notification is limited to the assignment of Lead Bank responsibility for the Bajali district.

5. Objective of the Notification

The notification seeks to operationalise banking administration and coordination mechanisms in the newly created Bajali district by assigning a designated Lead Bank and District Working Code.

The move is intended to facilitate effective implementation of the Lead Bank Scheme, strengthen financial inclusion efforts and support banking development activities in the district.

Click Here To Read The Full Update 

The post RBI Appoints Canara Bank as Lead Bank for Bajali District appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Case Details: Principal Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Shriti Verma [2026] 186 taxmann.com 966 (Delhi)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Dinesh Mehta & Vinod Kumar, JJ.
• Puneet Rai, SSC, Rishabh Nangia, JSC & Ashvini Kumar, Adv. for the Appellant.

Facts of the Case

The assessee was subjected to assessments for the relevant assessment years on a protective basis in connection with the subject foreign assets. Subsequently, in proceedings under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015, another Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee was not the beneficial owner of the subject assets.

In view of these observations recorded under the 2015 Act, the CIT(A) set aside the assessment orders passed under the 1961 Act. The Tribunal upheld the relief and set aside the protective assessments. Aggrieved by the order, the revenue filed the instant appeal before the High Court.

High Court Held

The Delhi High Court held that the mere fact that the assessee’s mother took the plea that the property would vest in the assessee after her demise cannot change the legal position. In other words, simply because the assessee is likely to inherit such property, the addition cannot be made, that too in the year under consideration.

Further, the Court held that no substance was found in the revenue’s apprehension that the assessee’s mother could change her version and take the plea that the property belonged to her daughter, namely the assessee. Therefore, no interference was warranted under the Court’s limited appellate jurisdiction under Section 260A.

The post No Tax Addition for Mere Expectation of Inheriting Foreign Assets | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

CA Sanjay Surendranath – [2026] 187 taxmann.com 157 (Article)

1. Introduction

Imagine running a highly profitable tech company, meticulously filing your taxes based on the established rules of your industry, only to wake up to a GST demand that wipes out every rupee your sector has ever generated.
On May 27, 2026, the division bench of the Supreme Court of India comprising Hon’ble Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Justice R. Mahadevan, handed down a 417-page judgment in Directorate General of Goods and Services Tax Intelligence (HQS) v. Gameskraft Technologies Private Limited [2026] 186 taxmann.com 1232 (SC) /[Civil Appeal No(S). 8241 – 8244 OF 2026] that completely reset the operational reality for real-money gaming (RMG) in India.

By setting aside the relief granted by the Karnataka High Court, the Supreme Court didn’t just validate a ₹21,000 crore tax notice for a single company; it fundamentally rewrote how the state classifies and taxes digital wagers, escalating the situation into a countrywide constitutional crisis.

For tax experts and industry founders, reading the bare text of the judgment offers a sobering lesson in statutory interpretation.

This is a breakdown of the Supreme Court’s exact rationale, the catastrophic shift in unit economics, and the rather narrow legal avenues left for the industry’s survival.

2. Core Issues Evaluated by the Court

To comprehend the scale of the legal conundrum, the Court systematically resolved four structural questions:

• The Skill vs. Chance Debate: If a digital game genuinely requires skill, does putting money on the table automatically transform the activity into “betting and gambling” under tax law?
• Nature of the ‘Product’: Were these gaming platforms merely acting as neutral digital matchmakers, or were they actively creating and supplying a taxable product, an “actionable claim”, when players pooled their cash?
• The Valuation Dilemma: Should GST be levied only on the platform’s commission (Gross Gaming Revenue), or on the full face-value of player deposits?
• Retrospective Applicability: Were the GST amendments made in August 2023 (which explicitly taxed online money gaming at 28%) prospective, or merely clarificatory of the rules as they existed since 2017?

3. Breakdown of the “Platform Fee” Defense

To understand the controversy further, we need to look at how the industry historically structured its revenue. Companies like Gameskraft Technologies(supra) positioned themselves strictly as digital landlords.

When players joined a virtual rummy table, they deposited a “buy-in” amount. The operators took a small cut, usually a 5% to 15% platform fee, recognizing only this as their Gross Gaming Revenue (GGR). The remainder formed the prize pool, which platforms argued they held purely in trust within secure escrow accounts. Operating under the premise that they were software service providers, these companies discharged an 18% GST strictly on their platform fee.

This structure held up until the Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) came knocking. The DGGI issued a show-cause notice demanding ₹21,000 crore, based on an argument that the platforms were actively supplying “actionable claims” in the nature of betting and gambling, attracting a 28% GST rate on the entire wagered amount.

Click Here To Read The Full Article

The post [Opinion] How the Supreme Court’s GST Ruling Reshaped Real-Money Gaming Economics appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source

Press Release: 2026-2027/376 dated 03.06.2026

The post RBI Denies Gold Sale Reports | Reserves Remain at 880.52 Tonnes appeared first on Taxmann Blog.

source