Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

Continuity and Evolution of computation of limitation periods for filing appeals or applications in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 372 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 268 of the Income-tax Act, 1961

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....order under challenge-from the statutory limitation period. This commentary undertakes a comprehensive analysis of Clause 372, explores its legislative intent, practical implications, and interpretative nuances, and then provides a detailed comparison with the existing Section 268. The discussion situates both provisions within the broader context of procedural fairness, access to justice, and effective tax administration. Objective and Purpose 1. Legislative Intent and Policy Rationale The fundamental objective behind both Clause 372 and Section 268 is to ensure procedural fairness in tax litigation. The law recognizes that an assessee cannot be expected to initiate an appeal or application against an adverse order without first having ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n prescribed for an appeal or an application under this Act, the day on which the order complained of was served and, if the assessee was not provided with a copy of the order when the notice of the order was served, the time required to obtain a copy of such order, shall be excluded." This provision is comprised of two distinct limbs: * Exclusion of the Date of Service: The day on which the order is served is not counted in the limitation period. * Exclusion of Time to Obtain Copy: If the assessee was not provided with a copy of the order at the time of service, the period required to obtain such copy is also excluded from the computation of limitation. 2. Interpretation of Key Elements * "Period of Limitation Prescribed for an App....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly minor stylistic variations. Both provide for the exclusion of: * The day on which the order is served * The time required to obtain a copy of the order, if not furnished at the time of service Section 268 (as amended) states: "In computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal or an application under this Act, the day on which the order complained of was served and, if the assessee was not furnished with a copy of the order when the notice of the order was served upon him, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of such order, shall be excluded." The only substantive difference is the use of "provided with a copy" (Clause 372) versus "furnished with a copy" (Section 268), which is semantically identical and does n....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ciples are likely to inform the interpretation and application of Clause 372 as well. 4. Continuity and Reforms The near-identical reproduction of Section 268 in Clause 372 suggests a conscious legislative decision to maintain continuity in procedural safeguards. The absence of substantive changes may be interpreted as a recognition of the adequacy of the existing regime. However, the evolving landscape of electronic communication may necessitate future clarifications, especially regarding digital service and deemed furnishing of copies. The law may also need to address situations where orders are uploaded on portals but not actively notified to assessees, or where technical glitches impede access. 5. Comparative Perspective: Other Stat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....certain practical and interpretive issues may arise: * Electronic Service and Digital Copies: With the increasing digitization of tax administration, questions may arise as to whether the provision of an electronic copy via email or portal constitutes "furnishing" or "providing" a copy for the purposes of Clause 372. Judicial clarification may be required to address whether the exclusion applies if an electronic copy is immediately accessible. * Delay Attributable to Assessee: If the delay in obtaining a copy is due to the assessee's own fault, such as failure to apply promptly or failure to collect the copy when ready, courts may need to determine whether the entire period should be excluded. * Proof of Application and Receipt: D....