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
    Maximum Marginal Rate and Surcharge for Discretionary Trusts: ITAT Special Bench Clarifies Slab-Base...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Classification of Quicklime under the Customs Tariff: CESTAT Bangalore's Reaffirmation of HSN-Based ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Reassessment Notices Post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA: Limitation and Sanction u/ss 149 and ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Seizure, Provisional Release and Limitation: Supreme Court on the Interplay of Sections 110(2), 110A...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Prima Facie Adjustments v. Substantive Adjudication: Procedural Boundaries in Return Processing (CPC...
    Survey, Unaccounted Stock (Eye-Estimates) and the Limits of Section 130: Statutory Primacy of Sectio...
    Input Tax Credit Abuse (ITC Fraud) and Judicial Review: Delhi High Court on Natural Justice, RUDs an...
    Writ Jurisdiction and Statutory Appeal in GST Fraud Investigations: A Judicial Re-affirmation
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) Post-Amendment, Accumulated Income and the Sixth Year: Legal Interpretation, Procedura...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Form No.10B & Section 119(2)(b): Condonation of Delay in Tax Exemption Claims: Principles, Precedent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Regulatory Ambit of Import of Second-Hand Electronic Capital Goods: Classification, Exemption and Pr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 195, DTAAs and Software Licences: A Practical Framework for Withholding Tax
    Provisional Attachment under GST: Draconian Powers, Statutory Time-Bars and the Rule of Law: Interpr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 263 Revisited: Jurisdictional Boundaries Where AO Takes a Plausible View on 80G Claims
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional Release in Customs Law: Balancing Revenue Protection and Commercial Fairness - A Compara...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Conditional Re-export and Revenue Safeguards: Judicially Crafted Remedies in Customs Adjudication
    GST Limitation Regime vs Executive Notifications: Judicial Review of Time-Limit Notifications under ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) After Finance Act, 2022: Utilization of Accumulated Income - Deemed Income, Vesting an...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    When Can an ITAT Reopen a Decision? Distinguishing Prior Binding Precedent from Subsequent Case-Law
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment and Jurisdiction: Reconciling JAO Roles with NFAC u/ss 144B & 151A (JAO / FAO)
❯❯
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
    Discretionary trusts taxed at maximum marginal rate must have surcharge computed under slab and threshold rules, not automatically at top rate.
    For private discretionary trusts taxed at the maximum marginal rate under sections 164/167B, the term denotes the highest basic slab rate under the Finance Act, but surcharge on that tax must be computed according to the Finance Act's slab- and threshold-based surcharge provisions; if the trust's total income does not cross the statutory surcharge threshold, no surcharge is leviable despite basic tax being at the top slab rate.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Quicklime classification: impure lime falls under specific tariff heading, not high purity calcium oxide, per HSN purity standard.
    The imported material, chemically tested as impure calcium oxide (about 92.2% CaO with mineral impurities), is classifiable under Heading 2522 10 00 as Quicklime. Chapter Note 1 to Chapter 25 must be read contextually and does not disqualify quicklime from Chapter 25 where the tariff text and HSN Explanatory Notes expressly contemplate calcined quicklime. Heading 2825 is confined to chemically pure calcium oxide (approximately 98% CaO) and its residuary sub-heading cannot displace the specific Heading 2522 unless that purity threshold and absence of impurities are met.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment notices: surviving-time computation under COVID-era relief and new limitation rules renders late notices time-barred.
    The court held that in transitional reassessment cases the appropriate sanctioning authority is determined by when the original three-year expiry fell within the COVID-era relief window, so approval by the ordinarily specified authority for within-three-year cases suffices; limitation is governed by a two-step surviving-time computation measured from the original notice as of the relief-window terminal date, excluding stayed periods and the time allowed to reply, and any later notice issued beyond that surviving time is time-barred under the substituted limitation regime read with the time-relief statute and the legal-fiction continuity.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Seizure of goods: six month statutory limit for issuing show cause notice is mandatory despite provisional release.
    The six month limit in Section 110(2) for issuing a show cause notice after seizure under Section 110(1) is mandatory; only a single six month extension under the first proviso is permissible. Provisional release under Section 110A does not suspend, extend or neutralise that time bar. The 2018 second proviso making the six month rule inapplicable where provisional release is ordered is a substantive change and does not validate pre amendment seizures prolonged without notice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Prima facie adjustments cannot decide debatable legal claims in return processing; contested deductions require scrutiny procedures.
    When a claimed deduction depends on timely deposit of employee welfare contributions and the legal question is debatable or pending higher adjudication, summary processing adjustments cannot be used to resolve the dispute; such matters require scrutiny or reassessment procedures and the validity of any processing-stage action must be judged by the law and facts existing at the time of processing.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Survey discovered unaccounted stock must be assessed under sections 35(6) and 73/74, not via section 130.
    Tax liability for unaccounted goods found in a survey must be determined under section 35(6) read with sections 73/74 of the GST Act; section 130 cannot be used to quantify tax or levy penalty in such cases. The statutory cross reference to sections 73/74 requires adherence to their procedural safeguards, and quantification based solely on eye estimates during survey is insufficient without proper weighment or verification.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit fraud: writ relief limited where appeals exist; hearings and raw RUDs generally suffice absent prejudice.
    The High Court held that writ jurisdiction must be exercised with restraint in complex ITC fraud matters appealable under Section 107; at least one personal hearing and provision of RUDs as collected by the Department generally suffice absent demonstrable prejudice; detailed allocation of penal liability under Sections 73/74/75(13)/122 requires adjudicatory or appellate factfinding and cannot be resolved in writ proceedings.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Writ jurisdiction limited where statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST fraud investigations; appellate forum preferred for evidentiary disputes.
    The High Court reaffirmed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is generally inappropriate where a statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST investigations alleging fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit through fake invoices. Courts should confine review to jurisdictional defects or breaches of natural justice; detailed evidentiary disputes involving voluminous Relied Upon Documents, recorded statements and transaction chains are better resolved by the specialised appellate forum, which should hear appeals on merits and avoid dismissing on limitation grounds where appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Prospectivity of tax amendments: changes to accumulation rules apply from their effective date, not to prior accruals.
    Interpretation of section 11(3) concludes that, under the pre-amendment text, accumulated charitable funds could be applied in the year immediately following the five-year accumulation period; the 2022/2023 amendment removing that year was treated as prospective under the presumption against retrospective tax imposition. Separately, corrections by the Centralised Processing Centre under section 143(1) are confined to mechanistic errors and should not resolve debatable substantive questions of statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax exemption claims should favor substantive rights over mere technical filing defects when bona fide.
    Equitable application of the Condonation Power requires authorities to admit late Form No.10B filings when short delays or credible explanations would otherwise strip claimants of substantive exemption rights; procedural defects such as digital-signature technicalities must be tested against documentary e-filing evidence and substantial compliance, while administrative safeguards permit subsequent verification of the audit report.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Imported second hand MFDs meeting HSE technical criteria can be exempt from BIS registration and obtain conditional provisional release.
    Where importers produce prima facie evidence that imported second hand MFDs meet the Highly Specialized Equipment (HSE) criteria (limited units per model and physical thresholds such as weight >80 kg), those devices are exempt from compulsory BIS registration under the CRO and fall within the FTP residuary category for second hand capital goods; accordingly, provisional release may be granted on conditions (bond/guarantee and document verification) without prejudice to final adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation for software determines withholding-non exclusive copies/licenses generally not subject to TDS unless income is chargeable.
    Payments for off the shelf/shrink wrapped software or hardware embedded software that constitute a resale of a copyrighted article or a grant of a non exclusive, restricted licence for internal use do not ordinarily constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or typical DTAA provisions; withholding under section 195 arises only where the non resident's receipts are chargeable to tax in India (e.g., due to a PE or transfer of substantive copyright rights), and retrospective domestic amendments cannot be used to impose past withholding obligations on payors who lacked notice of the expanded definition.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional attachment limits: fixed statutory expiry prevents re-issuance of lapsed attachment orders on same property.
    A provisional attachment under the CGST scheme automatically ceases on expiry of the statutory time limit; once it has lapsed by operation of law, tax authorities have no power to re issue or renew a fresh provisional attachment over the same property on substantially the same grounds, and any such fresh order is void. Procedural rules or executive instructions cannot be used to circumvent this statutory safeguard and must be aligned with the primary legislation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional jurisdiction cannot overturn a plausible assessment on charitable deductions where donation conditions are met.
    Tribunals held that Explanation 2 limiting CSR expenditure as a business deduction operates within the business income chapter and does not ipso facto bar claims under the donations regime; specific statutory exceptions indicate Parliament's choice to restrict only certain items. A mandatory CSR outlay does not automatically negate donation character where there is no material return, provided donee approval and documentary evidence are established. On revisional power, section 263 cannot be invoked to overturn an assessing officer's tenable, precedent backed view where enquiries were made; revision is justified only if the AO's conclusion is legally untenable or there was no inquiry.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of seized imports permitted subject to proportionate security, favouring bonds over bank guarantees before adjudication.
    Provisional release under Section 110 is permitted subject to proportionate protections: payment of duties as self-assessed; payment of a substantive portion (commonly fifty percent) of any departmental differential; and execution of enforceable bonds for the balance. Bank guarantees or cash security for speculative fines prior to adjudication are often disproportionate and may be replaced by bonds, though deliberate mis-declaration, concealment or prohibited imports justify stricter protective measures.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Conditional re-export of detained imports permitted when revenue is secured by enforceable financial guarantees and timelines.
    Courts may permit re-export of detained imports where the anticipated departmental remedy is monetary, provided the importer furnishes enforceable financial safeguards-typically a bond quantifying revenue exposure and a bank guarantee for a calibrated portion of the redetermined value-and complies with prescribed timelines; such orders are without prejudice to the Department's right to complete investigations, adjudicate, assess differential duties, and impose penalties.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Force majeure causation in GST limitation: proximate cause and mandatory council recommendation govern valid time limit extensions.
    Section 168A empowers executive modification of GST limitation periods but operates as delegated legislation subject to strict construction: valid exercise requires (i) a qualifying force majeure event, (ii) inability to complete prescribed actions, and (iii) proximate causation by that event; GST Council recommendation is a mandatory precondition and GIC substitution or post-facto ratification does not cure statutory defect.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Accumulated trust income: Tribunal rulings treat the 2022 amendment as prospective, preserving the prior six year utilisation window.
    Two Tribunal benches held that the Finance Act, 2022 amendment to the accumulation provision is prospective; accumulations made before 1 April 2022 remain governed by the prior law including the additional one year grace, and utilisation within that six year window cannot be taxed for AY 2023 24. The Tribunals relied on the presumption against retrospectivity, the Finance Bill memorandum stating an effective date of 1 April 2023, and fairness doctrines to conclude Parliament did not intend to curtail vested rights retroactively.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tribunal recall power limited: later judicial overruling alone cannot reopen finalized tax orders under review rules.
    The tribunal's power to amend is limited to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record existing at the time of the original order or to taking into account contemporaneous binding precedent not placed before it; a subsequent overruling or clarification by a superior court cannot alone justify recall, in light of the explanatory bar in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and related authorities.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Concurrent jurisdiction between JAO and faceless authorities affirmed; JAO may initiate reassessment followed by faceless assessment.
    The faceless scheme and RMS produce information that may be surfaced to the JAO, permitting the JAO to conduct the pre-notice inquiry and form satisfaction to issue a notice initiating reassessment; thereafter records may be transmitted for faceless assessment via automated allocation, embodying a two-stage model that preserves both JAO initiation authority and central faceless assessment.

    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