Loading...

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 characters 0/2000
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.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Digital Material Recovered in Search under Section 132 and Its Nexus with the Non-Searched Person: C...
    Refund Disputes Linked to Rule 96(10) and Rule 89(4B): Consequences of Omission of Rules Without Exp...
    Service Mechanisms (for Notices and SCN) in GST: Deemed Service, Portal Availability, and Statutory ...
    Case Laws Customs
    Due Compliance with Section 138C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 for Admissibility of Electronic Records...
    Case Laws Customs
    Sequential Application of the General Rules for Interpretation in Customs Tariff Classification unde...
    Section 74 CGST Proceedings and the Impermissibility of Clubbing Multiple Financial Years in a Singl...
    Composite Show Cause Notices Under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Requirement of Tax-Perio...
    Case Laws Customs
    Reverse Burden, Ownership Attribution, and Proof in Gold Seizure Cases: Reaffirming Procedural Safeg...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 68, Loan Credits, and the Limits of Suspicion: Evidentiary Discipline in Search-Linked Asses...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    JAO vs. FAO: Reassessment in the Faceless Era: The Continuing Validity of JAO Jurisdiction Pending S...
    Case Laws Indian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour, Tax Compliance, and Judicial Reform: Legally Enforceable Debt and Procedural Innov...
    Electronic Communication (E-Service) of Show Cause Notices on the GST Portal: Limits of Validity and...
    Electronic Credit Ledger and Revenue Protection: A Strict Construction of Rule 86A under the CGST Re...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Search, Seizure, and Total Income: Interpreting Section 153A in Light of Incriminating Material - 20...
    Case Laws Customs
    Writ Jurisdiction and Alternative Remedies: Bypassing Statutory Mechanisms: Limits of Article 226 Wh...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) denial on Share Buybacks under GST: Furtherance of Business vs. Statutory Exc...
    Deeming Fictions and ITC Reversal: Gujarat AAAR on Mutual Fund Transactions as Exempt Supplies
    Show Cause, Don't Pre-Determine: Judicial Scrutiny of Section 74 Notices under the TNGST Act / CGST ...
    Case Laws Benami Property
    Benami Attachments and the Collapse of Precedent: Tribunal's Response to the Ganpati Dealcom Review
    Case Laws Central Excise
    Dead Credits and Transitional Limits: CESTAT Larger Bench on Refund of Education and Krishi Kalyan C...
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Digital material recovered in a third party search cannot alone justify invoking Section 153C without a direct nexus to the non searched person.
Section 153C jurisdiction requires seized or requisitioned books of account or documents from a search that relate to or pertain to a non searched person; digital images recovered in a third party search that did not name or connect the petitioners could not sustain Section 153C. The Assessing Officer's reliance on post search forms, voluntary supply of documents, public domain inquiries, and an inferential consideration mismatch rendered the recorded satisfaction de hors the statutory trigger, allowing writ relief for jurisdictional defect.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
GST refund and recovery proceedings founded solely on omitted rules lapse absent express saving clause.
Omission of Rule 89(4B) and Rule 96(10) without an express saving clause causes pending proceedings and non-final orders founded solely on those rules to lapse, except for transactions past and closed. The General Clauses Act's preservation principle does not apply to omissions effected by subordinate rules/notification, and transitional or laying provisions of the parent statute do not operate as omnibus saving clauses. Consequently, undisposed show cause notices and orders dependent only on the omitted rules were quashed and affected refund applications were remitted for reconsideration after hearing within a stipulated period.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
GST electronic service by portal or email may not trigger appeal limitation absent verifiable communication or retrieval evidence.
Whether portal upload or e-mail intimation automatically triggers the limitation period under Section 107 depends on whether such electronic modes fall within the statutory deeming fictions of Section 169(2) or Section 169(3). Although Section 169(1)(c)-(d) and Rule 142 permit electronic service, the express deeming consequences are confined to specified modes; absent acknowledgement or verifiable retrieval logs, IT Act presumptions of dispatch/receipt do not alone establish communication for appeal limitation.
Case Laws Customs
Show AI Summary
Electronic evidence admissibility in customs proceedings: contemporaneous extraction records and Section 108 statements can satisfy the certificate requirement.
The Court held that contemporaneous extraction/printing records, device particulars, and un-retracted Section 108 statements acknowledging computer printouts can constitute substantive due compliance with Section 138C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962; a certificate not in prescribed format will not automatically invalidate admissibility where authenticity is not disputed, while other statutory evidentiary issues (including Section 138B) remain open for adjudication.
Case Laws Customs
Show AI Summary
Aluminium shelving classed by import condition: use allowed only if statutorily permitted; supports aren't parts at import.
Classification requires sequentially applying GRI 1 with relevant Section and Chapter Notes; aligned HSN Explanatory Notes guide interpretation. Use is relevant only where permitted and must reflect intended use objectively evident at importation per the as imported principle. A "part" must have an essential functional nexus to machine operation; mere supporting platforms or shelves that do not contribute mechanically to operation are not parts and may instead fall under material-based structure headings.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Composite GST show cause notices spanning multiple financial years misalign tax-period limitation and may be quashed.
Issuance of a single consolidated show cause notice covering distinct financial years was held impermissible because GST liability is tethered to tax-period returns and limitation timelines; consolidation misaligns period-specific adjudication clocks, constitutes a jurisdictional defect, and warrants quashing with liberty to re-issue notices in strict conformity with the period-wise statutory scheme.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Composite GST show cause notices aggregating multiple financial years lack scope; demands must be period-specific and limitation-linked.
The GST demand-and-recovery framework is period-based: tax liability and limitation are tied to returns for each tax period or financial year, and limitation is computed from the annual return due date or an erroneous return for that year. Consolidating multiple financial years into one consolidated show cause notice is outside the statutory design and constitutes a jurisdictional defect; administrative advisories cannot override the period-specific statutory scheme. Authorities may, if no other impediment exists, initiate proceedings framed strictly period-wise under the applicable demand provisions.
Case Laws Customs
Show AI Summary
Gold/jewellery cases require mandatory section 138B admissibility for investigation statements before proving ownership or smuggling links.
Section 138B creates a mandatory admissibility regime for section 108 investigation statements: unless clause (a) applies, the maker must be examined before the adjudicating authority and an admissibility opinion recorded before using those statements to prove truth. Ownership cannot be fixed on an appellant where such statements are excluded, and confiscation/penalty theories for jewellery must follow the correct statutory route-section 111 for imported goods and section 120 when alleging goods are made from smuggled inputs. Documentary explanations require verification before rejection.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Unsecured loans through banking channels cannot be treated as unexplained credits absent transaction specific incriminating material.
Unsecured bank routed loans cannot be treated as unexplained credits where the assessee produced confirmations, lender bank statements, audited accounts and tax filings, and the Assessing Officer relied chiefly on uncorroborated third party search statements or administrative press releases without transaction specific incriminating material. For years prior to the Finance Act, 2022 amendment, a generalized source of source obligation for loan credits is not mandated; repayments in the lender's account are distinct from fresh upstream borrowings. Appellate authorities may independently verify facts under their powers if the AO is given opportunity to respond.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reassessment jurisdiction: both JAO and FAO held to have concurrent authority, pending apex resolution of the faceless regime.
The Delhi High Court holds that both JAO and FAO possess concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment under Section 148, construing Section 151A as administrative/enabling rather than jurisdiction-extinguishing. It reasons that routine SLP dismissals do not automatically create binding Article 141 precedent to overturn a coordinate-bench High Court view, and declines to treat the Delhi precedent as per incuriam absent a contrary Supreme Court ratio; interim apex stays are case-specific and do not displace the Delhi position.
Case Laws Indian Laws
Show AI Summary
Cheque dishonour cases: statutory presumptions preserved; tax breaches don't negate enforceability; procedural reforms directed.
Once a cheque's execution is admitted, statutory presumptions of consideration and of a legally enforceable debt arise and, though rebuttable, the initial burden lies on the accused; unsupported claims of payer incapacity or a 'blank cheque' are insufficient without positive evidence. Breach of tax-related cash-transaction rules attracts fiscal penalties but does not render the underlying loan unenforceable for cheque-dishonour purposes. Revisional courts may not overturn concurrent factual findings absent perversity or jurisdictional error. Procedural reforms and calibrated compounding measures are directed to expedite and streamline Section 138 proceedings.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Electronic service of GST show cause notices must be in the prescribed portal location to ensure a real opportunity to be heard.
Uploading an SCN only under a secondary portal compartment, rather than the primary prescribed location, does not constitute due communication; where an adverse decision is contemplated the Proper Officer must afford an opportunity of hearing, and defective electronic service that prevents participation vitiates the ensuing adjudication, permitting writ intervention to set aside and remit for proper notice and hearing.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Electronic Credit Ledger blocking permitted only up to ITC actually available; negative balances and extra statutory recovery are impermissible.
Rule 86A may be invoked only where input tax credit is actually available in the Electronic Credit Ledger at the time of the blocking order; the power permits disallowing debit equivalent to such available credit as a temporary preventive measure and does not authorize creation of negative ledger balances or serve as a recovery provision. Excess blocking beyond the ECL balance is ultra vires and recovery must proceed under the Act's substantive provisions.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Search assessments under section 153A permit full reassessment for abated years but limit reopened completed years to incriminating search material.
Section 153A's assessment power is search-linked: for abated years the AO may reassess total income afresh, but for completed/unabated years additions under section 153A are permissible only where specific incriminating material relating to that year is found during the search; absent such material, disturbance of a completed assessment must proceed, if at all, under sections 147-148 subject to their conditions.
Case Laws Customs
Show AI Summary
Customs appeals: High Court writs are generally restrained where a statutory High Court remedy exists and limitation lapsed.
Where a statute provides a remedy to the High Court itself, the High Court will ordinarily decline writ intervention under Article 226 to avoid bypassing the statutory machinery; a litigant who has by his own default allowed the statutory limitation for a reference or appeal to lapse cannot ordinarily rely on Article 226 to cure that lapse, and claims of tribunal non consideration demand clear, specific, verified pleadings.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Share buybacks and GST: expenses tied to buybacks are not eligible for ITC, and common ITC must be reversed.
The authority held that shares are "securities" excluded from "goods" and "services," but section 17(3) and the Chapter V rules treat "transactions in securities" as part of the "value of exempt supply" for ITC apportionment; therefore GST paid on expenses directly related to a share buyback is not eligible as ITC under section 16(1), and common ITC attributable to both taxable operations and the buyback must be reversed using the prescribed deeming values.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
Mutual fund redemptions require proportionate ITC reversal under GST deeming provision; valuation set at 1% of sale value.
A statutory deeming provision includes transactions in securities within the value of exempt supply for ITC apportionment; the Explanation to the input tax credit rules fixes the value of a security at 1% of its sale value, and redemption of mutual fund units is treated as a sale for this limited valuation purpose, requiring proportionate ITC reversal where common inputs serve both taxable operations and such investment transactions.
Case Laws GST
Show AI Summary
GST extended-period proceedings require show cause notices to allege and disclose fraud or wilful misstatement.
Extended limitation under GST is available only where the tax shortfall is "by reason of" fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression to evade tax; these are jurisdictional facts. Show cause notices must allege such conduct and disclose the material basis for that inference, and must specify proposed amounts without language of final determination. Invocation of extended limitation without these ingredients vitiates proceedings and precludes remand; authorities may pursue recovery under the normal limitation where applicable.
Case Laws Benami Property
Show AI Summary
Benami property orders grounded on a recalled precedent must be re-adjudicated without treating that precedent as binding.
The Tribunal held that where an adjudicatory order under the PBPTA is substantially founded on a Supreme Court judgment that has been recalled on review, that order cannot stand; the correct remedial course is to set aside and remit for de novo adjudication so the Adjudicating Authority may re-examine evidence and apply the law without treating the recalled Ganpati Dealcom decision as binding on the question of the amendments' temporal applicability.
Case Laws Central Excise
Show AI Summary
Transition of cess credits: abolished cess balances are dead credits, not eligible for GST transition or cash refunds.
Unutilised Education Cess, Secondary & Higher Education Cess and Krishi Kalyan Cess balances whose utilisation was limited to the same cess and whose levies were abolished became dead CENVAT credits; they were not eligible for transition under the exhaustive list in Section 140 and its Explanations, and Section 142(3) only prescribes payment in cash where refund is otherwise due under existing law, not a new substantive right to refund or a means to evade pre GST limitation.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

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 Income Rate of Tax
1 Upto Rs. 4,00,000 Nil
2 Rs. 4,00,001 to Rs. 8,00,000 5%
3 Rs. 8,00,001 to Rs. 12,00,000 10%
4 Rs. 12,00,001 to Rs. 16,00,000 15%
5 Rs. 16,00,001 to Rs. 20,00,000 20%
6 Rs. 20,00,001 to Rs. 24,00,000 25%
7 Above Rs. 24,00,000 30%

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 

Aspect Section 115BAC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Clause 202 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
Applicability Initially individuals & HUFs; later expanded to AOPs, BOIs, artificial juridical persons Explicitly 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/Deductions Broadly 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-off No set off of losses or depreciation attributable to disallowed deductions; no set off of house property loss with other heads Same principle, with explicit deeming provision for losses/depreciation
Option Mechanism Option exercised via prescribed forms (Form 10-IE/10-IEA); business/professional income assessees have stricter withdrawal/re-entry rules Similar mechanism, with reference to procedural rules and stricter withdrawal/re-entry restrictions
IFSC Units Deduction u/s 80LA available to IFSC units under specified conditions Similar 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

Acts Income Tax