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
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

      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