Comparison of section 451 "Penalty for failure to comply with provisions of section 186." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs to taxpayers, assessing officers and advisors involved with transactions u/s 186. Effective/decision date: Not stated in the document. Background & Scope Statutory hook: Clause 451 is framed as "Penalty for failure to comply with provisions of section 186." The clause expressly links to section 186 of the (proposed) Income Tax legislation. The text provided is brief: it authorises the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received by a person in contravention of section 186, save where the person proves that there were "good and sufficient reasons" for the contravention. Definitions, detailed procedures, or explanatory notes are Not stated in the document. Statutory Provision Mode Text & Scope The clause reads: "The....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e applied. Exceptions/Provisos The sole proviso in the text is the exception where the person proves "good and sufficient reasons" for the contravention. The clause does not list thresholds, timelines or categories of accepted reasons. No additional provisos, carve-outs for specific classes of persons (e.g., companies, non-residents, financial institutions), or linkage to penalty mitigation mechanisms are provided in the clause text. Illustrations * Example 1: A person receives an amount in contravention of section 186. Under the clause, the Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to that amount unless the person proves good and sufficient reasons for the receipt. Specifics of the reasons and their sufficiency are Not stated in th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e the person proves "good and sufficient reasons" for contravention-placing an evidential burden on the taxpayer to avoid penalty. The enacted text removes that explicit proviso but also removes the taxpayer's expressly stated escape. The practical consequences are: * If the statute's omission was deliberate to make the penalty mandatory without any statutory escape, taxpayers lose the explicit statutory defence and face a stricter exposure to penalty equal to the amount received. * If, conversely, the assessing function is still subject to general principles (natural justice, reasoned order, or other statutory exceptions elsewhere), those may supply avenues for relief - but such avenues are not stated in Section 451 itself. *....