India’s incoming GAAR disputes: in conversation with Sanjay Sanghvi

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

India’s incoming GAAR disputes: in conversation with Sanjay Sanghvi

Sanjay Sanghvi resized.jpg

The Khaitan & Co partner also declared that the era of tax planning is over, in an exclusive ITR interview

A wave of Indian litigation related to new general anti-avoidance rules is on its way, Sanjay Sanghvi, a partner at local law firm Khaitan & Co, predicts in an interview with ITR.

GAAR rules are designed to eradicate tax evasion practices, giving authorities the power to deny certain tax benefits to taxpayers.

India’s GAAR rules became effective in April 2017, after first being proposed as part of the country’s Direct Tax Code Bill 2009.

“Since this is relatively new legislation, there are very few reported decisions which have examined the GAAR and its implications,” Sanghvi tells ITR.

However, he highlights one case, which began in 2022 and saw a judgment in June 2024, which he says provides a useful analysis of how India’s courts may approach GAAR issues.

In Ayodhya Rami Reddy Alla v Principal Commissioner of Income Tax at the Telangana High Court, the applicant, Alla, issued bonus shares to a shareholder firm called Ramky Estate and Farms (REF). The shares were then sold to a company named Advisory Services.

Due to the issued bonus shares, the value of each share that REF received was reduced to one-sixth of its previous value, resulting in a short-term capital loss to the applicant.

The applicant attempted to offset the losses against long-term gains made on a separate sale of shares and to file the income under ‘capital gains’ for the 2019/2020 assessment year. This led to the dispute with India’s income tax authority.

“The High Court upheld the tax authority’s action in invoking GAAR provisions on ‘bonus-stripping’ transactions on shares,” Sanghvi says.

“The court observed that the specific anti-avoidance rules (SAAR) for bonus stripping, as provided in the Indian Income Tax Act for the applicable assessment year, do not cover cases of bonus stripping on securities,” he adds.

“Therefore, the taxpayer’s argument that SAAR would override GAAR provisions was held to be incorrect.

“The court also noted that there was clear and convincing evidence to suggest that the entire arrangement was designed with the sole intent of avoiding taxes and hence the tax authorities were justified in invoking GAAR,” Sanghvi says.

Sanghvi predicts that this case represents the tip of the iceberg when it comes to future GAAR-related disputes in India.

“It is widely expected that one will see an increased number of GAAR-related disputes, given the high-stake transactions and commercial and regulatory complications and a desire for tax efficiency, as well as a sometimes-aggressive approach from tax authorities.”

End of an era

With India’s tax authorities seemingly intent on using new GAAR powers to clamp down on tax evasion, Sanghvi says, the concept of “tax planning” has all but diminished.

“To a great extent, the era of tax planning has come to an end,” he states.

“With the introduction of GAAR…there has been an increase in scrutiny and the assessment of transactions by the tax administration to improve tax buoyancy. Practically it’s becoming more and more challenging for taxpayers to do effective tax planning.”

This is especially true given recent transfer pricing (TP) dispute trends, says Sanghvi.

He argues that the Indian tax authorities are “recharacterising” advertising, marketing and promotion expenses as a TP issue, where Indian subsidiaries of foreign parent entities are being compensated on a “cost plus” mark-up basis.

Despite this aggressive attitude from the tax authorities, Sanghvi notes, taxpayers have scored some key wins in India in recent years.

In Blackstone Capital Partners (Singapore) v ACIT, a much-watched case from 2023, the High Court of Delhi ruled that a tax residency certificate was sufficient for a foreign investor to claim tax benefits based on the India-Singapore tax treaty.

The case provides significant reassurance for foreign investors looking to do business in India, Sanghvi says. However, he notes that the Supreme Court of India has since stayed the judgment, which will cause some uncertainties until a further ruling on the matter.

Sanghvi is due to discuss GAAR-related issues at ITR’s Managing Tax Disputes Summit, which is scheduled to take place in Amsterdam on September 10.

To register for ITR’s Managing Tax Disputes Summit, click here.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

But advisers also suggest that the proposals may lead to increased compliance costs and obligations
PwC’s ability to ‘quarantine critical information’ should raise concerns for regulators worldwide, Deborah O’Neill said in her warning letter to the PCAOB
After no party won a majority, it’s important that government formation talks are concluded quickly, one Irish tax partner said
Netherlands to think again on VAT increase; consumption tax levels stable in OECD
Problem solving skills are nothing more than a ‘nice to have’ for clients, according to new ITR+ research and conversations with six global in-house and advisory tax leaders
The US President’s decision comes despite him previously ruling out a pardon for his son
Despite China and India’s hesitation towards pillar two, there’s still enough movement in other countries for clients to start getting ready, James Badenach also tells ITR
The investigations dated back to 2015 and alleged that the companies received huge financial advantages from TP rulings; in other news, Australia is set to adopt a CbCR regime
Taxpayers would have to register controlled commodity transactions and declare information to the Brazilian tax authorities under the proposed regulations
The Senate passed three bills with amendments that will enact the OECD’s 15% minimum corporate tax rate on multinationals
Gift this article