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

      Introducing a new tax regime with revised tax slabs and by eliminating various exemptions and deductions : Clause 202 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 115BAC of the income tax Act, 1961

      2 May, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 202 New tax regime for individuals, Hindu undivided family and others.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 202 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a pivotal shift in the Indian tax regime for individuals, Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs), and other specified entities such as associations of persons (AOPs), bodies of individuals (BOIs), and artificial juridical persons. It is designed to streamline and simplify the computation of income tax by introducing a new tax regime with revised tax slabs and by eliminating various exemptions and deductions. This clause is a successor and evolution of the existing Section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which, along with the procedural Rules 21AG and Rule 21AGA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, currently governs the new tax regime's operational framework.

      The significance of Clause 202 lies in its comprehensive approach towards rationalizing the tax structure, broadening the tax base, and reducing the administrative burden both for taxpayers and the tax authorities. It reflects the government's ongoing policy direction to move towards a more transparent, equitable, and less exemption-driven tax system.

      Objective and Purpose

      The legislative intent behind Clause 202 is to further the government's agenda of tax simplification and to incentivize compliance by offering lower tax rates in exchange for foregoing a host of exemptions and deductions. The clause seeks to:

      • Consolidate and rationalize the tax slabs for individuals, HUFs, and other specified entities.
      • Eliminate the complexities associated with numerous exemptions and deductions, thereby making the tax system more straightforward and less prone to litigation.
      • Provide clarity and certainty to taxpayers regarding their tax liabilities.
      • Reduce the compliance burden by minimizing the need to track and claim various deductions and exemptions.
      • Align the Indian tax system with international best practices, where lower rates are often paired with a broader tax base.

      Historically, the Indian income tax regime has been characterized by multiple exemptions and deductions, resulting in a complex and often opaque tax structure. The new regime, as embodied in Clause 202, seeks to address these issues by offering taxpayers a choice between the old regime (with exemptions and deductions) and the new regime (lower rates, fewer deductions).

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 202 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Scope and Applicability

      Clause 202(1) applies to:

      • Individuals
      • Hindu Undivided Families (HUFs)
      • Associations of Persons (AOPs) (other than co-operative societies)
      • Bodies of Individuals (BOIs), whether incorporated or not
      • Artificial juridical persons referred to in section 2(77)(g)

      This broadens the scope beyond the initial coverage of Section 115BAC, which was originally limited to individuals and HUFs, but was later expanded to include AOPs, BOIs, and artificial juridical persons.

      2. Tax Rates and Slabs

      The new tax slabs under Clause 202(1) are as follows:

      Sl. No.Total IncomeRate of Tax
      1Upto Rs. 4,00,000Nil
      2Rs. 4,00,001 to Rs. 8,00,0005%
      3Rs. 8,00,001 to Rs. 12,00,00010%
      4Rs. 12,00,001 to Rs. 16,00,00015%
      5Rs. 16,00,001 to Rs. 20,00,00020%
      6Rs. 20,00,001 to Rs. 24,00,00025%
      7Above Rs. 24,00,00030%

      These slabs represent a further rationalization over the existing regime, with higher exemption limits and a more gradual progression of tax rates. For instance, the nil rate extends up to Rs. 4,00,000, and the highest 30% rate applies only above Rs. 24,00,000.

      3. Computation of Total Income

      Clause 202(2) mandates that total income for the purposes of the new regime shall be computed:

      • Without any exemption or deduction under various provisions, including specified Schedules and Sections (e.g., Schedule III, sections 144, 19(1), 22(1)(b), 33(8), 48, 49, 45(3), 46, 47(1)(a), and most of Chapter VIII except sections 124(1), 125(3), and 146).
      • Without set off of losses:
        • Carried forward or depreciation from earlier years, if attributable to the disallowed deductions.
        • Any loss under the head "Income from house property" with any other head of income.
      • Without any exemption or deduction for allowances or perquisites provided under any other law in force.

      This comprehensive exclusion of exemptions, deductions, and set-offs is central to the policy of broadening the tax base and simplifying compliance.

      4. Treatment of Losses and Depreciation

      Clause 202(3) stipulates that losses and depreciation referred to in sub-section (2)(b) are deemed to have been given full effect to, and no further deduction is allowed in subsequent years. This provision is aimed at preventing the carry-forward of losses and depreciation attributable to disallowed deductions under the new regime, ensuring a clean break from the old regime's tax treatment.

      5. Exercise of Option

      Clause 202(4) sets out the mechanism for exercising the option to opt into or out of the new regime:

      • For persons with business or professional income:
        • Option must be exercised on or before the due date for filing the return (section 263(1)).
        • Once exercised, the option applies to subsequent years.
        • Option can be withdrawn only once (other than the year of exercise), after which re-entry is barred except in cases where the person ceases to have business/professional income.
      • For persons without business or professional income:
        • Option is exercised along with the return of income for the year.

      This structure is designed to prevent frequent switching between regimes, thereby providing stability and predictability in tax planning.

      6. Special Provisions for International Financial Services Centre (IFSC) Units

      Clause 202(5) provides a carve-out for units in IFSCs that exercised the option for any year from 2020-21 to 2023-24. For these units, certain deductions remain available, subject to specific conditions, recognizing the policy objective of promoting IFSCs as international financial hubs.

      Ambiguities and Potential Issues

      • The reference to various Schedules and Sections for disallowed deductions may create interpretative challenges, especially where cross-references are involved or where legislative amendments alter the referenced provisions.
      • The transition provisions for losses and depreciation may require careful adjustment to prevent disputes regarding the written down value of assets and the treatment of unabsorbed depreciation.
      • The rigid restriction on re-entry into the new regime after withdrawal (for business/professionals) could be viewed as unduly harsh in cases of genuine hardship or business restructuring.

      Practical Implications

      The practical impact of Clause 202 is far-reaching:

      • Taxpayers: Individuals and entities must carefully evaluate whether the new regime is beneficial, given the loss of deductions versus the benefit of lower tax rates. Tax planning will shift from maximizing deductions to optimizing gross income.
      • Businesses: SMEs and professionals will need to adapt their accounting practices, especially regarding depreciation and loss carry-forwards.
      • Tax Authorities: Reduced scope for exemptions and deductions simplifies assessments and reduces litigation, but initial transition may require clarifications and robust taxpayer education.
      • Compliance: The need to file prescribed forms and exercise options within strict timelines (as detailed in Rules 21AG and 21AGA) heightens the importance of procedural compliance.

      Comparative Analysis with Existing Provisions

      1. Comparison with Section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      Section 115BAC, introduced by the Finance Act, 2020 and subsequently amended, is the current statutory provision for the new tax regime. The key points of comparison are as follows:

      • Applicability: Initially, Section 115BAC applied only to individuals and HUFs. Recent amendments (effective AY 2024-25 onwards) have expanded its scope to include AOPs, BOIs, and artificial juridical persons, aligning with Clause 202.
      • Tax Slabs: The slab structure u/s 115BAC has evolved:
        • For AY 2026-27 onwards, the slabs mirror those in Clause 202 (up to Rs. 4 lakh: Nil Rs. 4-8 lakh: 5%, etc.), ensuring continuity and predictability.
      • Denial of Deductions/Exemptions: Both Clause 202 and Section 115BAC(2) deny a similar range of deductions and exemptions, though the specific references differ due to legislative drafting. Both prohibit set-off of losses attributable to such deductions and bar house property loss set-off.
      • Deeming Provisions: The deeming provision for losses and depreciation is present in both, preventing carry-forward of disallowed losses/depreciation.
      • Option Mechanism: Section 115BAC(5)/(6) and Clause 202(4) are substantially similar in prescribing how and when the option to opt in/out must be exercised, with similar restrictions on withdrawal and re-exercise.
      • IFSC Carve-out: Both contain special provisions for IFSC units, allowing continued deduction u/s 80LA, subject to conditions.
      • Procedural Rules: Section 115BAC is supplemented by Rules 21AG (for sub-section 5) and 21AGA (for sub-section 6), which specify the forms and electronic filing mechanisms. Clause 202 will require similar procedural rules, likely modeled on these existing rules.

      Key Distinctions:

      • Clause 202 is prospective and designed to replace/amalgamate the provisions of Section 115BAC in the new Income Tax Bill, 2025, providing a consolidated and updated framework.
      • The references to various schedules and sections in Clause 202 may differ in detail from those in Section 115BAC, reflecting the new legislative architecture.

      2. Comparison with Rules 21AG of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (Exercise of Option u/s 115BAC(5))

      Rule 21AG prescribes the procedure for exercising the option u/s 115BAC(5). Key features include:

      • The option is to be exercised in Form No. 10-IE, electronically filed (digital signature or EVC).
      • The Principal Director General of Income-tax (Systems) is empowered to specify filing procedures, data structure, verification, and security protocols.

      Clause 202(4) continues this approach, with the expectation that similar procedural rules will be notified for exercising the option under the new regime. The emphasis remains on electronic filing and secure, standardized processes.

      3. Comparison with Rule 21AGA of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (Exercise of Option u/s 115BAC(6))

      Rule 21AGA, effective from assessment year 2024-25, extends the procedural framework to a broader class of taxpayers (including AOPs, BOIs, and artificial juridical persons) and introduces Form No. 10-IEA for exercising or withdrawing the option. Key features:

      • Business/professional income assessees must file Form 10-IEA by the due date for return filing.
      • Others can opt in via their return of income.
      • Electronic filing and EVC/digital signature are mandatory.
      • Withdrawal of option is also to be done in Form 10-IEA.

      Clause 202's procedural requirements are in consonance with these rules, reinforcing the government's emphasis on digital compliance and procedural certainty.

      Comparative Table 

      AspectSection 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, 1961Clause 202 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
      ApplicabilityInitially individuals & HUFs; later expanded to AOPs, BOIs, artificial juridical personsExplicitly includes individuals, HUFs, AOPs (other than co-op societies), BOIs, and artificial juridical persons
      Tax Slabs
      • 2021-2023: Nil up to Rs. 2.5 lakh, then 5% to 30% above Rs. 15 lakh
      • 2024-2025: Nil up to Rs. 3 lakh, then 5% to 30% above Rs. 15 lakh
      • 2026 onwards: Nil up to Rs. 4 lakh, then 5% to 30% above Rs. 24 lakh (as per latest amendments)
      • Nil up to Rs. 4 lakh
      • 5%: Rs. 4,00,001-Rs. 8,00,000
      • 10%: Rs. 8,00,001-Rs. 12,00,000
      • 15%: Rs. 12,00,001-Rs. 16,00,000
      • 20%: Rs. 16,00,001-Rs. 20,00,000
      • 25%: Rs. 20,00,001-Rs. 24,00,000
      • 30%: Above Rs. 24,00,000
      Exemptions/DeductionsBroadly disallows most exemptions/deductions under specified sections (e.g., section 10, 10AA, 16, 24, 32, 35, 80C, etc.), with some exceptions (e.g., employer contribution to NPS, 80JJAA)Disallows exemptions/deductions under specified Schedules/Sections, with some carve-outs (e.g., IFSC units)
      Loss Set-offNo set off of losses or depreciation attributable to disallowed deductions; no set off of house property loss with other headsSame principle, with explicit deeming provision for losses/depreciation
      Option MechanismOption exercised via prescribed forms (Form 10-IE/10-IEA); business/professional income assessees have stricter withdrawal/re-entry rulesSimilar mechanism, with reference to procedural rules and stricter withdrawal/re-entry restrictions
      IFSC UnitsDeduction u/s 80LA available to IFSC units under specified conditionsSimilar carve-out for IFSC units for years 2020-21 to 2023-24

      The most notable difference is the further rationalization and elevation of the exemption threshold and tax slabs in Clause 202, reflecting a continued policy of easing the tax burden on lower- and middle-income groups.

      Unique Features and Potential Conflicts

      • Broader Applicability: Clause 202 cements the inclusion of AOPs, BOIs, and artificial juridical persons, which were only later included u/s 115BAC through amendments and corresponding rules.
      • Higher Exemption Threshold: The move to a Rs. 4 lakh nil rate and higher slabs is a significant departure, likely to benefit a larger segment of taxpayers, especially in the lower and middle-income brackets.
      • Transition Management: The treatment of losses and depreciation, and the restriction on re-entry, could create hardships for taxpayers with fluctuating income profiles. There may be calls for more flexible provisions or hardship exceptions.
      • Potential for Litigation: As with any major legislative shift, ambiguities in cross-references, treatment of transitional losses, and procedural lapses could lead to disputes, necessitating judicial clarification.

      Conclusion

      Clause 202 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, marks a substantial evolution in the Indian tax landscape, building upon and refining the framework established by Section 115BAC and its allied rules. By further rationalizing tax slabs, broadening applicability, and eliminating most exemptions and deductions, the clause aims to create a simpler, more transparent, and equitable tax system. However, the transition to this regime will require careful management, robust procedural guidance, and possibly further legislative or judicial clarifications to address ambiguities and ensure taxpayer confidence.

      The interplay between Clause 202, Section 115BAC, and Rules 21AG and Rule 21AGA reflects a maturing policy approach that balances the goals of simplification, revenue generation, and taxpayer fairness. As the regime matures, future reforms may focus on addressing edge cases, refining procedural aspects, and ensuring that the new system delivers on its promise of simplicity and efficiency.


      Full Text:

      Clause 202 New tax regime for individuals, Hindu undivided family and others.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax