TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
Jurisdictional Architecture under the income tax : Clause 241 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with Section 120 as it exists under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The analysis examines similarities, differences, legal nuances, and the practical impact on stakeholders, while also identifying areas that may require further clarification or reform. Objective and Purpose The core objective of both Clause 241 and Section 120 is to provide a statutory basis for the distribution and exercise of powers among income-tax authorities. This is essential for the following reasons: * Administrative Efficiency: Ensuring that the Board can allocate and re-allocate jurisdiction and functions as required for effective tax administration. * Flexibility: Allowing higher authorities to step in or delegate functions, especially in complex or high-stakes cases. * Clarity: Providing legal certainty regarding which authority is responsible for specific functions, thus reducing disputes and confusion among taxpayers and officials. * Accountability: Defining the hierarchy and the scope of powers to prevent overreach or abdication of duties. Historically, the need for such provisions arose from the increasing complexity of tax administration and the necessity to adapt to changing economic realitie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the need for flexibility in tax administration. For example, certain regions may require specialized oversight due to economic activity, or certain classes of income (such as international transactions) may demand specialized expertise. Sub-section (5): General or Special Orders and Empowerment This provision, "without prejudice" to earlier sub-sections, grants the Board the power to issue general or special orders, subject to conditions, restrictions, or limitations. Specifically: * (a) The Board may authorize Principal Director General, Director General, Principal Director, or Director to perform functions of any other income-tax authority as assigned. * (b) It may empower specified income-tax authorities to issue orders in writing so that the powers and functions assigned to the Assessing Officer (AO) may be exercised by an Additional Commissioner, Additional Director, Joint Commissioner, or Joint Director. This facilitates specialized handling of cases, particularly those involving complex issues or requiring higher-level oversight. It also enables the Board to respond to workload imbalances or administrative exigencies. Sub-section (6): Deeming Provisions and Eliminati....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ffective workload management, specialization, and administrative flexibility, enhancing the overall efficiency of the tax administration apparatus. * For the Board: It cements the Board's role as the apex administrative body, capable of issuing binding directions, reallocating jurisdiction, and responding to emerging challenges. * For Legal Certainty: The deeming provisions and elimination of approval requirements prevent procedural delays and ensure that the transfer or sharing of powers does not create legal lacunae or procedural hurdles. However, the broad powers vested in the Board also require robust internal checks and clear communication to prevent arbitrary or inconsistent exercise of jurisdictional powers. Comparative Analysis: Clause 241 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 120 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Structural and Substantive Similarities Both Clause 241 and Section 120 share a common structure and legislative intent. The following key similarities are observed: * Central Role of the Board: Both provisions empower the Board to issue directions regarding the exercise of powers and performance of functions by income-tax authorities. * Delegation an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onal authorities, possibly reflecting a rationalization of the hierarchy. * Elimination of Explanatory Notes: Section 120 contains a specific Explanation for removal of doubts regarding higher authorities exercising powers of lower authorities, which is incorporated more directly in the operative text of Clause 241. Ambiguities and Potential Issues Despite the improvements, certain areas may warrant further clarification: * Scope of Board's Directions: While broad, the scope for judicial review of the Board's directions remains, especially if exercised arbitrarily or in violation of principles of natural justice. * Concurrent Jurisdiction: The practical management of concurrent jurisdiction (sub-section 7) may give rise to confusion or duplication unless operational guidelines are issued. * Deeming Provisions: The deeming provisions, while necessary for administrative flexibility, may lead to disputes if not properly communicated to taxpayers or if notifications are not promptly updated. * Technological Adaptation: The expanded notification powers under Clause 241(8) and (9) are positive, but their implementation must ensure that digital compliance mechanisms ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e change. Comparative Perspective: Other Jurisdictions Globally, tax administrations in advanced jurisdictions (such as the UK's HMRC or the IRS in the USA) similarly empower central authorities to allocate and delegate jurisdiction and functions for administrative efficiency. However, the Indian provisions are notable for their explicit detailing of the criteria for jurisdiction and the breadth of powers to re-allocate functions, reflecting both the scale and diversity of the Indian taxpayer base. Practical Implications: Stakeholder Impact * Taxpayers: The provisions provide legal certainty regarding the authority they must engage with, reducing the risk of jurisdictional disputes. However, taxpayers must stay informed about notifications and orders that may affect which authority has jurisdiction over their affairs. * Tax Professionals: Practitioners must be vigilant in tracking jurisdictional changes, especially in complex or high-value matters where higher authorities may assume jurisdiction. * Tax Administration: The flexibility to allocate, re-allocate, and share functions allows for better workload management, specialization (e.g., for international taxation or ....