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
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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