Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    TMI Notes

    Back

    All TMI Notes

    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
      No Records Found

      TMI Notes

      Back

      All TMI Notes

      whatsappJoin Channel
      Showing Results for : Reset Filters

      Capital gain Exemption through Investment in the Certain Bonds in Clause 85 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 54EC of Income Tax Act, 1961

      27 March, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 85 Capital gains not to be charged on investment in certain bonds.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 85 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 introduces a provision concerning the non-charging of capital gains tax on investments in certain bonds. This clause is significant as it provides a tax-saving avenue for taxpayers who realize capital gains from the transfer of long-term assets such as land or buildings. The clause aims to encourage investments in specified financial instruments by offering tax exemptions, thereby promoting economic growth and financial stability. The legislative context of this provision is rooted in the broader framework of capital gains taxation, which seeks to balance revenue generation with incentivizing productive investments.

      Objective and Purpose

      The primary objective of Clause 85 is to provide tax relief to taxpayers who reinvest capital gains from the sale of long-term assets into specified bonds. This provision aligns with the policy considerations of encouraging long-term investments and channeling funds into sectors deemed beneficial for economic development. Historically, similar provisions have been used to stimulate investments in infrastructure and other critical areas by offering tax incentives, thereby serving dual purposes of tax relief and economic stimulus.

      Detailed Analysis

      1. Conditions for Non-Chargeability of Capital Gains

      This sub-section outlines the conditions under which capital gains will not be charged. It specifies that if an assessee invests the entire or part of the capital gains from the transfer of land or building into a long-term specified asset within six months, the capital gains will either be partially or fully exempt from tax. The clause distinguishes between situations where the investment is less than or equal to the capital gains, affecting the taxable amount accordingly.

      2. Investment Threshold Limits

      This provision imposes a cap on the investment amount that can be exempted, limiting it to fifty lakh rupees during any tax year. This cap ensures that the tax benefit is targeted and does not lead to excessive revenue loss for the government. The limitation also applies cumulatively for the year of transfer and the subsequent tax year, thereby providing a clear framework for compliance.

      3. Transfer or Conversion of New Asset

      This clause deals with the scenario where the new asset is transferred or converted into money within five years of acquisition. In such cases, the previously exempted capital gains will be deemed taxable in the year of conversion, thus ensuring that the tax benefit is contingent on the retention of the investment for a specified period.

      4. Loans or Advances Against New Asset

      It states that any loan or advance taken on the security of the new asset will be treated as a transfer, triggering tax liability. This provision prevents the circumvention of the retention requirement by using the asset as collateral for loans.

      5. Deduction Restrictions

      This section clarifies that investments considered for exemption under this clause cannot claim deductions under another section, preventing double benefits.

      6. Definition of "New Asset

      The clause defines a "new asset" as a bond redeemable after five years and notified by the Central Government. This definition ensures that the tax benefit is aligned with investments that have a long-term horizon, contributing to economic stability.

      Practical Implications

      Clause 85 has significant implications for various stakeholders. For taxpayers, it provides a strategic option for deferring tax liability while contributing to economic development through specified investments. Businesses dealing in real estate and infrastructure may benefit from increased investment inflows. From a regulatory perspective, the provision necessitates clear guidelines and monitoring mechanisms to ensure compliance and prevent misuse.

      Comparative Analysis

      Comparing Clause 85 with similar provisions in other jurisdictions reveals both commonalities and unique features. Many countries offer tax incentives for reinvestment of capital gains, though the specifics, such as the types of eligible investments and retention periods, vary. The five-year retention requirement in Clause 85 is relatively stringent compared to some jurisdictions, reflecting a cautious approach to ensuring long-term economic benefits.

      Conclusion

      Clause 85 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, provides a well-structured mechanism for capital gains tax exemption through investments in specified bonds. It balances the need for tax incentives with safeguards against revenue loss and misuse. Future developments may include judicial clarifications on ambiguities and potential reforms to adapt to evolving economic conditions.

      Section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      Introduction

      Section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is a statutory provision that offers a tax exemption on capital gains arising from the transfer of long-term capital assets, provided the gains are reinvested in specified bonds. This section plays a crucial role in the taxation framework by encouraging the reinvestment of capital gains into productive sectors, thus aligning individual tax planning with national economic objectives. The provision has undergone several amendments, reflecting the evolving policy priorities and economic conditions.

      Objective and Purpose

      The legislative intent behind Section 54EC is to incentivize taxpayers to reinvest capital gains into long-term specified assets, thereby promoting infrastructure development and other critical sectors. By offering a tax exemption, the provision seeks to channel financial resources into areas that can drive economic growth and development. The historical context of this section highlights its role in supporting government initiatives in infrastructure and rural electrification.

      Detailed Analysis

      1. Conditions for Exemption

      Sub-section (1) sets the conditions under which capital gains from the transfer of long-term assets, such as land or buildings, are exempt from tax if reinvested in specified bonds within six months. The provision delineates scenarios based on the proportion of reinvestment relative to the capital gains, with varying tax implications. This sub-section is critical as it establishes the criteria for availing the tax benefit, requiring precise compliance by taxpayers.

      2. Provisions for Investment Limits

      The section imposes a cap of fifty lakh rupees on the reinvestment amount in specified bonds, applicable per financial year. This limit ensures equitable access to tax benefits, preventing excessive advantage by high-net-worth individuals. However, it may also restrict the provision's appeal for larger investors, potentially impacting the volume of funds directed towards government projects.

      3. Transfer or Conversion of Bonds

      Sub-section (2) addresses the scenario where the specified bonds are transferred or converted into money within three years, deeming the initially exempted capital gains as income in the year of conversion. This clause ensures that the investment serves its intended long-term purpose, deterring short-term holding for tax avoidance.

      Explanation: Loans Against Bonds

      The explanation section deems any loan or advance taken against the specified bonds as a conversion into money, effectively nullifying the tax benefit.

      This anti-abuse measure prevents taxpayers from circumventing the lock-in period by monetizing the bonds through loans.

      4. Restrictions on Deductions

      This sub-section prohibits deductions u/s 80C for investments in specified bonds already considered u/s 54EC. This prevents double-dipping, ensuring that taxpayers do not claim multiple tax benefits for the same investment.

      5. Definition of "Long-term Specified Asset"

      The definition of "long-term specified asset" includes bonds notified by the Central Government, redeemable after a specified period. This ensures that the eligible bonds are of a long-term nature, aligning with the provision's policy objective of fostering sustainable investments.

      Practical Implications

      Section 54EC has significant implications for taxpayers, offering a strategic avenue for tax planning and deferral of capital gains tax liability. It also impacts sectors like infrastructure and rural electrification, potentially increasing investment inflows. Regulatory bodies must ensure clear guidelines and monitoring to prevent misuse and ensure compliance.

      Comparative Analysis

      Comparing Section 54EC with similar provisions in other jurisdictions reveals a common approach of using tax incentives to promote reinvestment of capital gains. However, the specifics, such as eligible investments and retention periods, vary, reflecting different policy priorities and economic contexts. The provision's focus on infrastructure and rural electrification aligns with national development goals, distinguishing it from more general investment incentives elsewhere.

      Conclusion

      Section 54EC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, provides a robust framework for capital gains tax exemption through investments in specified bonds. It effectively balances tax incentives with safeguards against revenue loss and misuse. Future developments may include judicial clarifications on ambiguities and potential reforms to adapt to changing economic conditions.

       


      Full Text:

      Clause 85 Capital gains not to be charged on investment in certain bonds.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax