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
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
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
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    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

      Taxation of income from Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) earned by resident employees of Indian companies or their subsidiaries engaged in specified knowledge-based industries or services : Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 vs. Section 115ACA of the Income Tax Act, 1961

      1 May, 2025

      Contents
      Notifications
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 193 Tax on income from Global Depository Receipts purchased in foreign currency or capital gains arising from their transfer.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a significant legislative provision that addresses the taxation regime applicable to income derived from Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) purchased in foreign currency, and capital gains arising from their transfer, by resident employees of Indian companies or their subsidiaries engaged in specified knowledge-based industries or services. This provision is a successor and, in many respects, a restatement with modifications of the existing Section 115ACA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. To understand the full import of Clause 193, it is essential to examine its objectives, structure, and implications, and to compare these with the extant Section 115ACA and the relevant notifications-namely, Notification No. S.O.1120(E) dated 12-11-2001 and Notification No. 11293 dated 28-03-2000 which specify the eligible schemes under the provision. The significance of Clause 193 lies in its targeted application to a select group of taxpayers-resident employees of Indian companies or their subsidiaries in specified sectors-who are incentivized through concessional tax treatment on income from GDRs acquired under notified Employee Stock Option Schemes (ESOPs). The provision is situated within the broader policy context of encouraging foreign investment, employee participation in equity, and the development of knowledge-based sectors in India.

      Objective and Purpose

      The legislative intent behind both Clause 193 and its predecessor, Section 115ACA, is to facilitate and incentivize the participation of employees in the equity of their employers, particularly in globally competitive, knowledge-driven industries. By providing concessional tax rates on dividends and capital gains arising from GDRs purchased in foreign currency, the law seeks to:

      • Encourage Indian companies to offer ESOPs involving GDRs as part of their employee compensation and retention strategies;
      • Enhance the competitiveness of Indian companies and their subsidiaries in attracting and retaining skilled talent;
      • Channel foreign currency inflows into the Indian corporate sector through the mechanism of GDRs;
      • Align the Indian tax regime with international best practices for employee stock incentives and cross-border securities offerings.

      The notifications u/s 115ACA further operationalize this intent by specifying the eligible schemes-namely, "the Issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds and Ordinary Shares (Through Depository Receipt Mechanism) Scheme, 1993"-thereby ensuring that only bona fide ESOPs structured under government-approved frameworks benefit from the concessional regime.

      Detailed Analysis Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Scope and Applicability

      Clause 193 (IT Bill, 2025):

      - Applies to a resident individual who is an employee of an Indian company (or its subsidiary, including those incorporated outside India) engaged in a "specified knowledge based industry or service."

      - Covers income from (i) dividends on GDRs issued under a notified ESOP and purchased in foreign currency; and (ii) long-term capital gains from the transfer of such GDRs.

      Section 115ACA (IT Act, 1961):

      - The scope and target beneficiaries are identical: resident employees of Indian companies or their subsidiaries in specified knowledge-based sectors, holding GDRs acquired under a government-notified ESOP.

      Notifications (S.O.1120(E) and 11293):

      - Both notifications specify the "Issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds and Ordinary Shares (Through Depository Receipt Mechanism) Scheme, 1993" as the eligible scheme for the purposes of Section 115ACA, and by extension, Clause 193.

      Comparative Note:

      - Both the old and new provisions maintain a narrow, targeted scope, ensuring that the concessional regime is available only to employees in sectors identified as critical for India's knowledge economy and only in respect of GDRs acquired under prescribed schemes.

      2. Income Streams and Tax Rates

      Clause 193:

      - Dividends on GDRs: Taxed at a flat rate of 10%.

      - Long-term capital gains on transfer of GDRs: Taxed at a flat rate of 12.5%.

      - Other income: Taxed as per normal rates after excluding the above incomes.

      Section 115ACA:

      - Dividends on GDRs: Taxed at 10%.

      - Long-term capital gains: - Prior to 23rd July 2024: 10% rate. - On or after 23rd July 2024: 12.5% rate (amended by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024).

      - Other income: Taxed as per normal rates, after exclusion.

      Comparative Note:

      - The primary difference is the uniform application of the 12.5% rate for long-term capital gains in Clause 193, whereas Section 115ACA provides a transition: 10% for transfers before 23rd July 2024, and 12.5% thereafter.

      - The dividend rate remains unchanged at 10% in both provisions.

      - The structure-separating the concessional incomes from other income for tax computation-remains constant.

      3. Deductions and Computation Mechanism

      Clause 193:

      - If the gross total income consists solely of GDR dividends, no other deductions are allowed.

      - If the gross total income includes GDR dividends or GDR capital gains, the gross total income is reduced by such amounts for the purposes of computing deductions under other provisions.

      Section 115ACA:

      - Contains identical provisions regarding the denial of deductions where the gross total income consists only of GDR dividends, and the reduction mechanism where such income is included alongside other income.

      Comparative Note:

      - Both provisions aim to prevent double benefits-i.e., concessional tax rates and deductions-on the same income.

      - The mechanism ensures that the tax incentive is limited to the specified income streams, and the normal deduction regime applies only to the balance income.

      4. Computation of Capital Gains

      Clause 193:

      - Explicitly provides that Section 72(6) (presumably dealing with set-off of losses) shall not apply for computation of long-term capital gains from GDRs.

      Section 115ACA:

      - States that the first and second provisos to Section 48 (which deal with indexation and computation of capital gains in foreign currency) do not apply to GDR capital gains.

      Comparative Note

      - The approach to capital gains computation is slightly different in drafting. Clause 193 refers to Section 72(6) (which, in the context of the 2025 Bill, may have replaced the role of Section 48 provisos or may relate to a new computation rule), whereas Section 115ACA specifically excludes indexation and foreign currency computation benefits for GDRs.

      - The underlying intent is to prevent additional tax benefits (such as indexation or currency fluctuation adjustments) on top of the concessional rate.

      5. Definitions and Key Terms

      Both provisions provide detailed definitions for the following terms:

      • Global Depository Receipts (GDRs): Instruments created by an Overseas Depository Bank outside India or in an International Financial Services Centre (IFSC), issued against ordinary shares or foreign currency convertible bonds. The definition has been updated over time to include GDRs issued against shares of companies incorporated outside India, provided they are listed and traded in an IFSC.
      • Specified knowledge-based industry or service: Includes information technology software, information technology service, entertainment service, pharmaceutical industry, biotechnology industry, and any other industry or service as notified by the Central Government.
      • Subsidiary: Defined as per the Companies Act, 2013 (Clause 193) or Companies Act, 1956 (Section 115ACA), including subsidiaries incorporated outside India.
      • Information technology service/software, Overseas Depository Bank: Definitions remain consistent across both provisions.

      Comparative Note: - The definitions have evolved to keep pace with changes in corporate law (shift from Companies Act, 1956 to 2013) and to accommodate international developments, such as the emergence of IFSCs. - The scope of eligible GDRs has been broadened over time, reflecting the globalization of Indian corporate structures and capital markets.

      6. Notifications and Their Role

      Notification No. S.O.1120(E)  dated 12-11-2001) and Notification No. 11293 dated 28-03-2000

      - Both notifications specify the "Issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds and Ordinary Shares (Through Depository Receipt Mechanism) Scheme, 1993" as the eligible scheme for the purposes of Section 115ACA.

      - These notifications are critical in operationalizing the concessional regime, as only GDRs issued under such notified schemes are eligible.

      Comparative Note:

      - The requirement for notification ensures regulatory oversight and restricts the benefit to government-approved ESOPs, preventing misuse.

      - Clause 193 continues the notification requirement, reaffirming the central government's role in designating eligible schemes.

      Practical Implications

      1. For Employees

      - Employees in targeted sectors who acquire GDRs under notified ESOPs benefit from a lower tax rate on dividends (10%) and long-term capital gains (12.5%).

      - The denial of deductions on such income simplifies compliance and prevents tax arbitrage.

      - The structure incentivizes employees to participate in global equity offerings, enhancing their alignment with corporate performance and global competitiveness.

      2. For Employers (Indian Companies and Subsidiaries)

      - The ability to offer GDR-based ESOPs with concessional tax treatment is a valuable tool for talent acquisition and retention, especially in globally competitive industries.

      - The provision encourages Indian companies to access international capital markets and to structure employee compensation in line with global best practices.

      3. For Regulators and Policymakers

      - The notification mechanism provides regulatory control, ensuring only genuine, government-approved schemes benefit.

      - The provision aligns with policy goals of attracting foreign investment, deepening capital markets, and supporting the knowledge economy.

      4. For Tax Administration

      - The clear definition of eligible income and denial of deductions reduces ambiguity and potential for litigation.

      - The exclusion of indexation or currency adjustment benefits (or set-off, as per the new clause) simplifies tax computation and reduces administrative burden.

      Comparative Analysis: Clause 193 vs. Section 115ACA

      AspectClause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025Section 115ACA of the Income Tax Act, 1961Observations/Changes
      BeneficiariesResident employee of Indian company or its subsidiary in specified industry/serviceSameNo change
      Eligible IncomeDividends on GDRs; Long-term capital gains on GDRsSameNo change
      Dividend Tax Rate10%10%No change
      Long-term Capital Gains Tax Rate12.5%10% (before 23-07-2024); 12.5% (on/after 23-07-2024)Clause 193 applies 12.5% uniformly (post-2024 transition)
      DeductionsDisallowed if only GDR income; reduced gross total income if GDR income includedSameNo change
      Capital Gains ComputationSection 72(6) not applicableSection 48 provisos not applicablePossible change in computation rule depending on new Act's structure
      DefinitionsReferences Companies Act, 2013; includes IFSC, overseas subsidiariesReferences Companies Act, 1956; includes IFSC, overseas subsidiariesUpdated for new company law; otherwise similar
      Notification RequirementCentral Government notification for eligible ESOP schemesSameNo change

      Ambiguities and Potential Issues

      • Transition in Capital Gains Computation: The shift from exclusion of Section 48 provisos to exclusion of Section 72(6) may indicate a change in the computation mechanism for capital gains; this requires clarification in the context of the new Income Tax Bill's structure.
      • Definition of "Specified Knowledge-Based Industry or Service": While the core sectors are listed, the phrase "any other industry or service as specified by the Central Government" leaves room for further expansion, necessitating timely notifications for clarity.
      • Notification Dependency: The benefit is contingent on timely government notification of eligible ESOP schemes; delays or ambiguities in notification may affect taxpayer certainty.
      • Consistency in Definitions: The update to Companies Act, 2013 is appropriate, but cross-references in subsidiary definitions and IFSCs should be harmonized for consistency across tax and company law frameworks.

      Conclusion

      Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, is a direct continuation and modernization of the concessional tax regime for income from GDRs acquired by resident employees of Indian companies or their subsidiaries in specified knowledge-based sectors. The provision preserves the core structure and intent of Section 115ACA, while updating certain aspects-such as the applicable capital gains tax rate and statutory cross-references-to reflect current legal and economic realities. The associated notifications remain integral, ensuring that only government-approved ESOPs benefit from the regime. The comparative analysis reveals a high degree of continuity, with changes primarily reflecting the evolution of the corporate and tax regulatory landscape. The provision continues to serve as a targeted tool for incentivizing employee participation in global equity offerings, supporting the growth of knowledge-driven industries, and aligning India's tax policy with international practices.


      Full Text:

      Clause 193 Tax on income from Global Depository Receipts purchased in foreign currency or capital gains arising from their transfer.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax