Comparison of section 478 "Wilful attempt to evade tax, etc." 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

....es are limited to drafting choices concerning the sequencing of penal provisions, the expression of liability to fine, and the treatment of concomitant penalties. The provisions affect taxpayers, prosecution authorities and courts. Effective date or enactment date: Not stated in the document. Background & Scope Statutory hooks: Clause/Section 478 under the chapter "Offences and Prosecution" in the Income Tax Bill/Act, 2025. Context: penal sanction for wilful attempts to evade tax, penalty or interest, and for under-reporting income. Coverage: criminal punishment (rigorous imprisonment) with fine; definition of "wilful attempt" is expanded by illustrative acts involving books of account or other documents. Definitions or explanations beyon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ative acts in sub-section (4) suggests a purposive approach to include both direct falsification and indirect circumvention. The tiered sentencing linked to a monetary threshold (Rs. 25 lakh) indicates legislative intent to calibrate punishment to seriousness of evasion. Beyond these inferences, the document does not state legislative history, debates, or explicit interpretive guidance; Not stated in the document. Exceptions/Provisos No exceptions or provisos are contained in the clause/section text. The Act clarifies that the punishment is "without prejudice to any penalty that may be imposable under any other provision of this Act." There are no express exclusions (for instance, bona fide mistakes, reasonable cause, or small-value de mi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1 is labelled Section 478 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (final Act text). Document 2 is Clause 478 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (old Bill text). Key textual differences and their practical effects are as follows: * Expression of liability to fine in sub-section (1): Bill (old version) explicitly states "shall also be liable to fine" in both clauses (a) and (b) and adds "and shall also be liable for penalty that may be imposable on him under any other provision of this Act." The Act version mirrors imprisonment terms but in (1)(a) and (1)(b) uses "and with fine" (Act (1)(a)) and "and with fine" (Act (1)(b) in effect), and relocates the statement about penalties to a separate sub-section (3): "The punishment referred to in this section,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ating additional liability; the Act's phrasing stresses non-exclusivity and preserves other penalties without explicitly stating an added mandatory liability. This could afford courts or authorities interpretive clarity that proceedings under other provisions remain available, but does not remove liability to other penalties where statutory provision prescribes them. * Minor textual difference in clause (4)(d): Bill uses "which may have the effect of enabling such person to evade" whereas Act uses "which will have the effect of enabling such person to evade." * Practical impact: "May have" in the Bill suggests potentiality, while "will have" in the Act suggests a firmer causal effect. The Act's firmer language may broaden prosec....