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
    Judicial and Legislative Perspectives on Mens Rea in Income Tax Prosecutions :Clause 490 of the Inco...
    Presumptions in Tax Offence Prosecutions : Clause 489 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 278D ...
    Karta and Member Liability for Tax Offences : Clause 488 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 27...
    Directors' and Officers' Liability for Corporate Tax Offences : Clause 487 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Balancing Deterrence and Fairness : Clause 486 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 278AA of Income-...
    Enhanced Penalties for Repeat Tax Offenders specified under Indian Tax Law: Clause 485 of the Income...
    Penal Provision for abetment in relation to the making and delivering of false returns - Clause 484 ...
    Penal Provision for Offences Relating to Falsification of Books in Indian Tax Law : Clause 483 of th...
    Prosecution for False Verification under Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 482 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penal Provisions for Failure to Produce Accounts and Documents : Clause 481 of the Income Tax Bill, ...
    Penal Provision for Failure to Furnish Return in Search Cases : Clause 480 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Penal Provisions for Failure to File Income Tax Returns : Clause 479 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Criminal Liability for Tax Evasion in India : Clause 478 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 27...
    Criminal Liability for TCS Defaults : Clause 477 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 vs. Section 276BB of Incom...
    Criminal Liability for TDS Defaults : Clause 476 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 276B of th...
    Evolution of Statutory Offences Against Tax Recovery in India : Clause 475 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Penal Provisions for Non-Compliance during Tax Inspections : Clause 474 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025...
    Penal Consequences for Non-Compliance with Tax Authority Orders : Clause 473 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Redefining the Bar of Limitation for Tax Penalties : Clause 472 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...
    Natural Justice and Administrative Oversight in Tax Penalties : Clause 471 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption of culpable mental state shifts evidentiary burden to accused to disprove intent beyond reasonable doubt.
    Clause 490 mandates that once the prosecution establishes the actus reus, the court shall presume the existence of a culpable mental state-broadly defined to include intention, motive, knowledge, belief and reason to believe-and permits the accused to rebut that presumption only by proving absence of such mental state beyond reasonable doubt.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption regarding assets and documents found in searches shifts evidentiary burden, now including virtual digital assets.
    Clause 489 creates a rebuttable presumption that assets (including virtual digital assets) and books or documents found in a person's possession during an authorised search, or received via requisition, are presumed to belong to that person and that documents' contents are true when tendered in prosecution, applied "so far as may be" by reference to the Bill's presumption provision and extending to other persons identified by the Bill's connected-person provision.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption of karta guilt shifts evidential burden, requiring demonstration of due diligence to avoid prosecution.
    Clause 488 places primary criminal responsibility on the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family by deeming the karta guilty of an offence by the HUF, subject to statutory defences of lack of knowledge or proof of having exercised all due diligence. It further deems any member guilty where the offence is proved to have been committed with that member's consent or connivance or is attributable to their neglect, creating independent member liability while preserving the karta's available exculpatory defences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Corporate officer liability: deeming provision shifts initial burden to accused, with due diligence defence for tax offences.
    Where a company commits an income-tax offence, the company and every person who was in charge of, and responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business at the time are statutorily deemed guilty and liable to prosecution, subject to a defence that the individual lacked knowledge or exercised all due diligence to prevent the offence; separate liability arises where the offence occurred with the consent, connivance, or neglect of officers, companies are punishable by fine while individuals may face full penal consequences, and definitions explicitly include firms and associations of persons.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable cause defence limits criminal liability for certain tax compliance failures, protecting bona fide taxpayers from prosecution.
    Clause 486 creates a non obstante statutory reasonable cause defence prohibiting punishment for failures under the specified sections of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 when the accused proves reasonable cause. The provision places the burden of proof on the accused, preserves judicial fact specific assessment of reasonable cause, and operates to limit prosecutions for bona fide or uncontrollable lapses while directing enforcement attention to willful or egregious defaults.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Enhanced penalties for repeat tax offences impose mandatory imprisonment and fine upon subsequent convictions under specified tax provisions.
    A prior judicial conviction under any specified income tax offence triggers enhanced punishment: a person again convicted under any of those listed offences is subject to mandatory rigorous imprisonment and a mandatory fine, regardless of whether the subsequent conviction is for the same or a different listed offence; judicial discretion governs the precise sentence within the prescribed range, and the provision applies only after a prior conviction, not mere charge or prosecution.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Abetment of false returns: broadened criminal exposure for facilitators with mandatory imprisonment and fines for culpable conduct.
    Clause 484 criminalises abetment or inducement in making or delivering false tax-related statements, requiring that the abettor know the falsity or not believe the statement to be true. Punishment is tiered by the quantum sought to be evaded, with mandatory minimum imprisonment terms and fines, while procedural details and definitions such as "induce" are not specified, raising interpretive and evidentiary challenges. The clause mirrors prior law's structure but broad wording could implicate advisors and intermediaries absent judicial or legislative clarification.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Falsification of accounting records: criminal liability for wilful false entries intended to enable another person to evade tax.
    Clause 483 makes it an offence to wilfully make or cause false entries in books of account or other documents with intent to enable another person to evade tax, interest, or penalty; it requires proof of wilful conduct and intent but not proof that the beneficiary actually evaded liability, covers physical and electronic records relevant to tax proceedings, and prescribes rigorous imprisonment and a fine.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    False verification offences: criminal liability requires proved knowledge or recklessness, with graded imprisonment and mandatory fines.
    The provision criminalises making false statements in any statutory verification or delivering false accounts where the person knows or believes the statement to be false or does not believe it to be true. Prosecution must prove this mental element beyond reasonable doubt. A graded penalty applies according to the financial impact of the falsity: substantial evasion attracts a higher term of rigorous imprisonment while other cases attract a lower term, and a fine is mandatorily imposed in addition to imprisonment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Willful failure to produce accounts triggers criminal liability including imprisonment and mandatory fine under the new tax provision.
    Clause 481 establishes a penal offence for willful failure to produce accounts and documents called for by a notice under section 268(1), or willful non compliance with a direction under section 268(5), punishable by rigorous imprisonment for up to one year and liability to fine, with criminal prosecution requiring proof of willfulness beyond reasonable doubt and adherence to procedural safeguards; the clause mirrors prior law while leaving the fine quantum unspecified and raising interpretative issues regarding the threshold for willfulness and potential overlap with other provisions.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Wilful failure to furnish return in search cases creates criminal liability, exposing taxpayers to imprisonment and fines.
    Clause 480 penalises a person who, following a search and pursuant to a notice under section 294(1)(a), wilfully fails to furnish a return of income within the prescribed time. The provision requires proof of deliberate non compliance, treats the offence as criminal, and prescribes imprisonment along with a court levied fine, while prosecutions remain subject to ordinary criminal procedure and due process safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Willful failure to file returns attracts graded criminal penalties including imprisonment and fine; an extended cure period limits prosecutions.
    Clause 479 criminalizes the willful failure to furnish returns of income, applying to statutory filing obligations and notice-triggered duties, and establishes a graded criminal penalty regime tied to the tax that would have been evaded. It preserves a mens rea requirement, mandates imprisonment and fine across tiers, and provides exemptions including a one-year cure period to avoid prosecution and a de minimis exception for non-corporate taxpayers, while raising interpretative issues on the definition of wilfulness and calculation of evaded tax.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Wilful tax evasion criminalisation: updated offence framework tightens penalties and preserves additional monetary sanctions for deliberate under-reporting.
    Clause 478 establishes an offence of wilful attempt to evade tax, penalty, or interest, including under-reporting, distinguishing evasion of liability from evasion of payment. It prescribes graded sentences with discretionary fines and makes offenders liable to any other penalties under the Act. The provision's inclusive definition-false entries, false statements, wilful omissions, and other enabling circumstances-broadens prosecutorial scope while retaining the requirement to prove mens rea and preserving procedural safeguards for prosecution.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to remit tax collected at source: criminal liability retained with a filing linked safe harbour to encourage timely compliance.
    Clause 477 criminalizes failure to remit tax collected at source, adopting a strict liability approach that imposes custodial sentence and fine while offering a statutory safe harbour where TCS is deposited on or before the time prescribed for filing the TCS statement, thereby aligning penal consequences and procedural exemption with the existing framework.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Criminal liability for failure to remit TDS expands enforcement and broadens managerial responsibility, with strict penalties.
    Clause 476 criminalizes failure to deposit taxes deducted or collected at source under Chapter XIX-B, extending liability to those who "pay or ensure payment" and prescribing rigorous imprisonment and fine. A proviso bars prosecution if the tax is credited to the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the relevant TDS statement, while cross references to notes and tables expand the catalogue of covered transactions and may complicate interpretation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Fraudulent asset dissipation criminalized: intent-based offence bars transfers aimed at defeating prescribed tax recovery proceedings.
    Clause 475 penalizes the fraudulent removal, concealment, transfer, or delivery of any property or interest with the intent to prevent it from being taken in execution of a prescribed recovery certificate, requiring proof of deceitful intent and applying to tangible and intangible interests; it retains the punitive framework of rigorous imprisonment and fine while replacing an explicit Second Schedule reference with a flexible "as prescribed" linkage to recovery procedures.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to provide inspection facilities criminalises obstruction during tax inspections, attracting imprisonment and fine under the new bill.
    Clause 474 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, makes it an offence to fail to afford an authorised officer the necessary facility to inspect books of account or other documents under section 247(1)(b)(ii), punishable with rigorous imprisonment for up to two years and a fine. The clause largely mirrors Section 275B of the 1961 Act, raises interpretive issues about the definition of "necessary facility" and mens rea, and creates potential overlaps with other penal provisions, while preserving continuity in enforcement policy.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Contravention of tax authority orders may attract imprisonment and fine under the new income tax framework.
    Clause 473 establishes an offence for contravening orders under section 247(1)(viii) or (4), penalising such contraventions with rigorous imprisonment up to the statutory maximum and a fine. The clause focuses on breaches concerning custody, retention, or handling of assets or records during investigative processes. It does not specify mens rea or procedural attributes such as cognizability or bailability, so application and defences will be shaped by judicial interpretation and the Bill's broader procedural framework.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation period for tax penalties: quarter based uniform timeline aligns penalty orders with assessment and appellate outcomes.
    Clause 472 standardises the limitation for imposing tax penalties by prescribing a uniform six month period measured from the end of the quarter tied to the completion of proceedings, appellate or revisional orders, or issuance of a penalty notice; it permits revision of penalty orders to reflect subsequent assessment modifications, mandates a reasonable opportunity to be heard before adverse penalty action, and excludes rehearing and judicial stay periods from limitation computation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax penalties: hearing rights and hierarchical approval govern imposition and administrative oversight under new bill.
    Clause 471 requires that no penalty be imposed without the assessee being heard or given a reasonable opportunity, mandates prior Joint Commissioner approval for penalties exceeding specified officer thresholds, and requires that penalty orders passed by authorities other than the Assessing Officer be sent to the Assessing Officer. It mirrors core safeguards of the existing law but omits scheme enabling provisions for faceless, technology driven procedures and transitional rules, creating potential uncertainties over thresholds, definition of reasonable opportunity, procedural delays, and modernization.

    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

      Statutory deduction for interest income derived from deposits : Clause 153 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 80TTA of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      21 April, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 153 Deduction for interest on deposits.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Introduction

      Clause 153 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, proposes a statutory deduction for interest income derived from deposits, specifically targeting individuals, senior citizens, and Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs). This provision is situated within the broader legislative context of providing relief to small savers and encouraging savings through formal financial channels. The clause is a successor, and in many respects a re-casting, of the existing Section 80TTA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which currently governs deductions for interest earned on savings account deposits. Section 80TTA, introduced by the Finance Act of 2012 and effective from the assessment year 2013-14, was a significant measure to provide relief to individual and HUF taxpayers in respect of interest income from savings accounts, thereby fostering a culture of savings and financial inclusion. The subsequent introduction of Section 80TTB in 2018 created a higher threshold for senior citizens, reflecting evolving policy priorities. Clause 153, as proposed in the Income Tax Bill, 2025, seeks to consolidate, expand, and clarify the scope of such deductions, introducing notable changes in eligibility, quantum, and coverage. The comparative analysis of Clause 153 and Section 80TTA is essential for understanding the trajectory of legislative intent, the practical implications for taxpayers, and the potential areas of ambiguity or reform.

      2. Objective and Purpose

      Legislative Intent and Policy Considerations The primary objective behind Section 80TTA and its successor, Clause 153, is to incentivize small savings by providing a deduction for interest income earned by individuals and HUFs from savings accounts. The legislative history indicates a clear policy focus on:

      • Encouraging the use of formal banking channels for savings.
      • Providing tax relief to small depositors, particularly those with modest interest income.
      • Ensuring that the deduction is not exploited by non-individual entities or through indirect means.
      • Recognizing the unique requirements of senior citizens, as reflected in the higher deduction threshold.

      Clause 153 further refines the legislative intent by explicitly incorporating senior citizens and extending the deduction to a higher amount for them, while also clarifying the treatment of time deposits and the eligibility of HUFs.

      3. Detailed Analysis of Clause 153

      3.1. Structure and Scope Clause 153 is structured as follows:

      • Sub-section (1): Specifies eligible assessees (individuals, senior citizens, and HUFs) and the types of deposits/institutions eligible for the deduction.
      • Sub-section (2): Prescribes the quantum of deduction based on the class of assessee and type of deposit.
      • Sub-section (3): Excludes certain entities (firms, AOPs, BOIs) from availing the deduction indirectly.
      • Sub-section (4): Defines "time deposits."

      3.2. Eligible Assessees Clause 153(1) expands the scope of eligible assessees by explicitly mentioning:

      • (a) Individuals, not being senior citizens;
      • (b) Individuals, being senior citizens;
      • (c) Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs).

      This is a departure from Section 80TTA, which covers only individuals and HUFs, with senior citizens excluded by virtue of Section 80TTB. Clause 153 amalgamates the treatment of all individuals, including senior citizens, within a single provision, but with differential deduction limits.

      3.3. Eligible Institutions and Deposits Clause 153(1) allows deductions for interest on deposits with:

      • Banking companies governed by the Banking Regulation Act, 1949;
      • Co-operative societies engaged in banking, including co-operative land mortgage/development banks;
      • Post Offices as defined under the Post Office Act, 2023.

      This is substantially similar to Section 80TTA, except for the update in the Post Office Act reference (from the 1898 Act to the 2023 Act), reflecting statutory modernization.

      3.4. Quantum of Deduction Clause 153(2) prescribes the quantum as follows:

      • (a) For non-senior individuals and HUFs: Deduction up to Rs. 10,000 on interest from savings account deposits, excluding time deposits.
      • (b) For senior citizens: Deduction up to Rs. 50,000 on interest from savings account deposits, including time deposits.

      This is a significant shift from Section 80TTA, which allows only up to Rs. 10,000 for all eligible individuals and HUFs (excluding senior citizens, who are covered u/s 80TTB with a Rs. 50,000 limit including time deposits). Clause 153 therefore consolidates and aligns the treatment of senior citizens within the same provision, while expanding the scope for them to include time deposits.

      3.5. Exclusion of Indirect Deduction Clause 153(3) mirrors Section 80TTA(2) by denying the deduction in cases where the interest income is derived from a savings account held by or on behalf of a firm, association of persons (AOP), or body of individuals (BOI), preventing partners or members from claiming the deduction indirectly.

      3.6. Definition of Time Deposits Clause 153(4) defines "time deposits" as deposits repayable on expiry of fixed periods, identical to the explanation in Section 80TTA.

      4. Practical Implications

      4.1. Impact on Taxpayers

      • Non-Senior Individuals and HUFs: The deduction quantum and conditions remain largely unchanged from Section 80TTA. Interest up to Rs. 10,000 from savings accounts (excluding time deposits) is deductible, thus maintaining status quo for this class.
      • Senior Citizens: The most significant impact is on senior citizens, who are now included within the same provision, with a higher deduction limit of Rs. 50,000, and crucially, on both savings and time deposits. This aligns with the policy u/s 80TTB but consolidates the law for ease of reference and application.
      • HUFs: The position for HUFs remains the same, with eligibility for deduction up to Rs. 10,000 on interest from savings accounts (excluding time deposits).

      4.2. Compliance and Procedural Aspects

      • Taxpayers must identify the nature of deposit (savings vs. time deposit) and their status (senior citizen or not) to determine the applicable deduction.
      • Interest on time deposits is only deductible for senior citizens; others must exclude such interest from the deduction computation.
      • Interest income from joint accounts with firms, AOPs, or BOIs is specifically excluded, preventing misuse.
      • The revised reference to the Post Office Act, 2023, may require taxpayers and institutions to update references in documentation and compliance systems.

      4.3. Administrative and Regulatory Impact

      • The consolidation of provisions for all individuals (including senior citizens) may simplify administration and reduce errors in claim processing.
      • The explicit inclusion of time deposits for senior citizens may require additional reporting by banks and post offices to facilitate accurate deduction claims.

      5. Comparative Analysis: Clause 153 vs. Section 80TTA

      5.1. Eligibility

      AspectSection 80TTA of the Income-tax Act, 1961Clause 153 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
      Individuals (non-senior)EligibleEligible
      Senior CitizensNot eligible (covered under 80TTB)Eligible (higher limit)
      HUFsEligibleEligible
      Firms/AOPs/BOIsNot eligible, including indirect claimsNot eligible, including indirect claims

      5.2. Quantum and Nature of Deduction

      AspectSection 80TTAClause 153
      Deduction Limit (non-senior individuals/HUFs)Rs. 10,000 (savings accounts only, excluding time deposits)Rs. 10,000 (savings accounts only, excluding time deposits)
      Deduction Limit (senior citizens)Not applicable (see 80TTB: Rs. 50,000, including time deposits)Rs. 50,000 (savings and time deposits)
      Time DepositsNot eligible (for any assessee under 80TTA)Eligible for senior citizens only

      5.3. Eligible Institutions Both provisions allow interest from:

      • Banking companies under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949
      • Co-operative societies engaged in banking
      • Post Offices (reference updated in Clause 153 to the 2023 Act)

      5.4. Anti-Avoidance Provisions Both provisions deny deduction for interest earned by or on behalf of a firm, AOP, or BOI, ensuring that only individual or HUF savings are incentivized and preventing indirect claims through partnership or association structures.

      5.5. Definitions The definition of "time deposits" is identical in both provisions, ensuring continuity in interpretation.

      5.6. Legislative Consolidation and Clarity Clause 153 consolidates the provisions for all individuals, including senior citizens, within a single clause, whereas under the 1961 Act, senior citizens are covered separately u/s 80TTB. This consolidation may reduce confusion and streamline compliance.

      6. Conclusion

      Clause 153 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents an evolutionary step in the legislative framework governing deductions for interest income from deposits. By consolidating and clarifying the provisions applicable to individuals, senior citizens, and HUFs, the clause seeks to simplify compliance, provide targeted relief, and prevent abuse through indirect claims. The inclusion of senior citizens within the same provision, with a higher deduction limit and coverage of time deposits, aligns with the broader policy objective of supporting the financial security of the elderly. The practical implications for taxpayers are largely positive, with the main compliance requirement being the accurate aggregation and reporting of eligible interest income. The revised reference to the Post Office Act and the consolidation of provisions may require minor administrative adjustments but are unlikely to pose significant challenges. Potential areas for further clarification include the definition of "senior citizen," the treatment of joint accounts, and the interaction with other deduction provisions. Judicial or administrative guidance may be required to address these nuances and ensure uniform application.


      Full Text:

      Clause 153 Deduction for interest on deposits.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax