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 LawsCustoms
    Decoding the Interplay of Customs Duty, Interest, and Confiscation Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Assessment u/s 153C: Reckoning the Limitation Period
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting 'Initiation' of Penalty Action u/s 275(1)(c): Period of Limitation
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Decoding the Exemptions for International Tax Charges
    Interpreting Rule 86A: Safeguarding Taxpayers' Rights in ITC Blocking
    Writ Jurisdiction Not a Shortcut to Bypass Tax Adjudication Process, Rules Court: Judicial Disciplin...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Interplay of Sections 153A and 153C in Search Assessments: Limitation and Reassessment ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Valuation and Classification: Upholding Due Process and Objective Assessment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Case Transfers: Place of Business vs. Registered Office: Determining the Appropriate Juri...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Writ Petitions and Section 153C Proceedings: Examining the High Court Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Time Limits for 80G Registration for Charitable Institutions: Avoiding Absurdity in the...
    Unraveling the Web: Forgery, Fake GST Firms, and the Pursuit of Economic Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interplay between the provisions of Section 153C and Section 147: Limits on Automatic Reassessment i...
    Decoding the GST Forgery Case: Balancing Personal Liberty and Safeguarding Public Interest for Grant...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Equity and Justice in Tax Matters: Condonation of Bona Fide Delays
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Embracing Equity in Tax Laws: Recognizing Genuine Difficulties in Condonation of Delays in filing of...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Recovery Proceedings Against Legal Heirs of Sole Proprietors: Invalidity of Demand Notices Issued Ag...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Jurisdiction of DRI Officers: Supreme Court Upholds Section 97 of Finance Act 2022 validating Custom...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Dissecting the Legality of IGST on Ocean Freight for FOB Imports: Refund of IGST
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Real Income Taxation: Avoiding Double Disallowance of Wages and Salaries Payable
❯❯
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 LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Customs duty liability on redemption: assessment under Section 28 triggers interest under Section 28AB for delayed payment.
    The court concluded that duty liability arises when an owner redeems confiscated goods under Section 125(2), while the procedural assessment and determination of that duty can be carried out under Section 28, and that the interest provision of Section 28AB applies where Section 28 is invoked for such duties; the Jagdish Cancer ratio does not preclude applying Section 28 in confiscation-redemption assessments.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation under Section 153C: six-year period runs from receipt of seized documents, requiring assessment under Section 153C.
    Where seized assets, documents and digital data recovered from a third party are found to relate to another person, the date on which the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction receives those seized materials is the deemed date of search for reckoning the six-year limitation period; that deemed date determines the relevant assessment year and which prior six assessment years fall under the special procedure for initiating assessments under Section 153C.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Initiation of penalty proceedings: limitation runs from the Assessing Officer's reference, barring belated penalty orders.
    Initiation of penalty proceedings occurs when the Assessing Officer makes a reference to the competent authority; the subsequent show cause notice is a procedural opportunity and does not restart the limitation period, so the statutory limitation for completing penalty proceedings runs from the date of the Assessing Officer's reference and a penalty order passed after that period is time barred.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment procedure must govern issuance of Section 148 notices in international tax matters, irrespective of residency.
    The court held that the plain language of the faceless scheme, Section 144B(2) and the CBDT order requires that issuance of Section 148 notices in matters involving international tax charges comply with the mandatory faceless assessment procedure, irrespective of the taxpayer's residency status, and that notices issued without adherence to that procedure are inconsistent with the statutory scheme.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    ITC blocking under Rule 86A: restricts orders to credit presently available in the electronic credit ledger, limiting retrospective blockage.
    Rule 86A(1) functions as a temporary protective mechanism that may be invoked only where input tax credit is currently available in the taxpayer's electronic credit ledger and the officer has reasons to believe that such present credit has been fraudulently availed or is ineligible; the expression "amount equivalent to such credit" must be read together with the condition of availability in the ECL and does not authorise retrospective blocking of ITC already utilised or refunded.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exhaustion of statutory remedies prevents direct writ challenges to tax demands absent exceptional circumstances or factual disputes.
    The court held that exhaustion of statutory remedies bars writ relief where efficacious alternate remedies exist and where resolution requires factual or classification inquiries; finding no exceptional circumstances to bypass the statutory process, the court dismissed the writ petitions but granted liberty to the petitioners to pursue statutory remedies, including filing responses to show cause notices or appeals against adjudication orders within the period allowed, subject to compliance with prescribed conditions such as pre-deposit obligations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment limitation: commencement depends on AO's recorded satisfaction, not the search date, for non-searched entities.
    Reassessment of a non-searched entity under Section 153C must be measured from the date the Assessing Officer records satisfaction about the seized material's relevance to that entity, not from the date of the search when the same AO is involved; the proviso to Section 153A(1) prevents the extended limitation period introduced by the 2017 amendment from applying to searches before the statutory cutoff, and physical handover of materials is a machinery provision rather than the substantive commencement trigger.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Transaction value protection: declared import price accepted; principal-use classification of motor controllers affirmed after procedural defects in reassessment were found
    The tribunal upheld the declared transaction value, finding that the authority enhanced assessable value without following statutory procedures and without proving non-comparability; NIDB assessed-value data alone was insufficient. On classification, the motor controllers were held to be parts principally used with electric motors and correctly classed under CTH 8503, with explanatory notes and the principal-use test displacing revenue's attempt to treat them as vehicle accessories.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Place of business controls assessment jurisdiction; transfer permitted where incriminating materials were seized in that jurisdiction.
    When incriminating materials seized in a particular circle are directly connected to an assessee's business activities and essential to assessment, the assessing authority may transfer proceedings to the circle where those materials were seized. The decision emphasizes that place of business-reflecting where operative evidence and activities occurred-can control assessment jurisdiction, and that transfer facilitates a coordinated investigation while procedural safeguards like show cause notices and opportunities to reply remain relevant.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Writ jurisdiction preserved where exceptions to alternative remedies exist; defective Section 153C compliance undermines post-search assessments.
    The court analysed when High Court writ jurisdiction may be exercised despite alternative remedies, reiterating exceptions for violations of natural justice, lack of jurisdiction, or fundamental rights. It examined Section 153C procedural requirements, particularly the necessity of a valid satisfaction note by the Assessing Officer of the searched person, time limits and jurisdictional competence, and the limited evidentiary value of loose sheets and retracted statements absent corroboration.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Time limits for 80G registration: purposive interpretation prevents existing charities being barred and preserves merit-based verification.
    The Tribunal construed the amended registration scheme to hold that the six month filing period tied to commencement of activities applies to newly formed institutions that have not begun activities, not to existing charities that obtained provisional approval; it required the assessing authority to treat applications filed within six months before provisional approval expiry as within time and to verify eligibility on merits, providing opportunity to supply documents.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Admissibility of custodial disclosures: discovery linked statements can be admitted, shaping jurisdiction and bail in GST fraud cases.
    The summary addresses three operative legal points: admissibility of custodial disclosures limited to parts directly leading to discovery of material items; jurisdictional inquiry in multi state economic offences founded on connections between the complainant, place of lodging the FIR and links to accused and firms; and stringent bail evaluation in large scale economic crimes considering gravity, evidence, punishment, risk of tampering, accused's influence and public interest, applied to a scheme of forged GST firms and bogus invoices.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Non obstante clause in third party search provision applies only after the AO assumes jurisdiction by issuing a notice.
    The Assessing Officer of the other person must record satisfaction that incriminating material relates to that person's total income for specific assessment years before issuing a third party notice; the non obstante clause in the third party provision applies only after the Assessing Officer assumes jurisdiction by issuing such a notice and does not oust regular reassessment provisions where jurisdiction under the third party scheme is not assumed.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Bail in economic offences: stricter scrutiny where circumstantial financial links to proceeds of crime risk investigation and public interest.
    The court examined bail appropriateness where applicants allegedly knowingly received and concealed proceeds from a large-scale GST fraud involving fake registrations and bogus invoices. It treated unexplained transactions as strong circumstantial evidence of complicity and applied a heightened bail regime for serious economic offences, weighing gravity of offence, public fund loss, evidence strength and risk of tampering. Gender or familial ties were held insufficient to justify leniency when individuals are shown to have benefited from proceeds of crime.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: bona fide short technical glitches in filing income tax returns warrant equitable condonation by authorities.
    The High Court held that a one day, bona fide delay in filing an income tax return due to a technical portal glitch could not be rejected merely because the return had been processed with a demand; such reasoning was misconceived. Applying earlier authorities that endorse an empathetic and non rigid approach, the court emphasised that short delays caused by genuine human or technical problems should be condoned in exercise of administrative discretion, reinforcing the primacy of equity and justice in condonation applications for returns.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: personal illness of a tax professional can justify relief in filing income tax returns.
    The summary establishes that under Section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, delay in filing returns caused by personal difficulties of a chartered accountant (such as illness of a family member) can be a genuine reason for discretionary condonation; authorities should assess such claims sensitively, require reasoned disbelief if rejecting medical evidence, and interpret discretionary tax powers in light of equity, substantial justice and harmonious construction.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Invalidity of notices to deceased persons prevents recovery from legal heirs absent specific statutory machinery enabling continuation.
    Issuance of a demand or show cause notice to a deceased sole proprietor is a jurisdictional defect because notice to the correct person is a condition precedent under the Customs Drawback Rules; absent a statutory machinery provision or voluntary submission by legal representatives, recovery of erroneously availed drawback and penalties cannot be pursued against legal heirs.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction of revenue intelligence officers affirmed: legislative validation sustains past customs show cause notices as constitutionally permissible.
    The Court concluded the defect identified in Canon India is unfounded when Notification No. 44/2011 and amended Section 17 are read together, distinguishing assessment functions under Section 17 from recovery under Section 28, and held that Section 97 of the Finance Act, 2022 validly and purposively validates past show cause notices issued by DRI and similarly situated officers, with retrospective application limited to the object of validation and passing Article 14 tests of reasonable classification and proportionality.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    IGST on ocean freight invalid where IGST already paid on import value, preventing double taxation under valuation rules.
    The court held that where IGST has been paid on the value of imported goods inclusive of cost, freight and insurance under Section 5(1) of the IGST Act read with the Customs Act, the CIF/FOB distinction is immaterial and a notification provision seeking separate IGST on ocean freight for FOB imports cannot be sustained, reinforcing fiscal neutrality and preventing double taxation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Timing difference in wage provisions prevents double disallowance; actual payment deductible after reversal.
    Where provisions for wages and salaries are reversed in the return and actual payments are later made and evidenced, those entries represent a timing difference rather than inherently bogus expenditure; treating the same item as disallowable in the earlier year and again disallowing the later payment would result in double disallowance contrary to the taxation of real income.

    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

      Special Taxation of Non-Resident Sportsmen and Entertainers : Clause 211 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. section 115BBA of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      2 May, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 211 Tax on non-resident sportsmen or sports associations.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 211 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 introduces special provisions for the taxation of non-resident sportsmen, sports associations, and entertainers, mirroring and updating the existing regime under section 115BBA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. These provisions are designed to ensure the taxability of incomes accruing to non-resident individuals and entities from specified activities conducted in India. The legislative focus is on preventing tax leakage from cross-border sporting and entertainment activities, reflecting both policy continuity and certain procedural enhancements.

      This commentary examines Clause 211 in depth, elucidates its objectives, dissects its operative mechanisms, and compares it with the established framework u/s 115BBA. The analysis explores legislative intent, practical implications, interpretative nuances, and the significance of these provisions in the context of India's evolving tax landscape.

      Objective and Purpose

      Legislative Intent and Policy Rationale

      The core objective of both Clause 211 and Section 115BBA is to provide a clear, simple, and effective mechanism for taxing income earned by non-resident sportsmen, sports associations, and entertainers from activities conducted in India. The rationale for such special provisions is multifold:

      • Source-Based Taxation: India, like many jurisdictions, asserts the right to tax income arising or accruing within its territory, even if the recipient is a non-resident. Sporting and entertainment activities often involve transient presence and complex payment structures, which can lead to tax avoidance if not specifically addressed.
      • Administrative Simplicity: By prescribing a flat rate of tax and denying deductions for expenses, the law simplifies compliance and administration, reducing disputes over allowable deductions and ensuring a minimum tax collection.
      • Level Playing Field: The provisions aim to ensure that non-resident participants do not enjoy a tax advantage over resident counterparts, thus maintaining fairness in the taxation regime.
      • Revenue Protection: With the globalization of sports and entertainment, significant sums flow to non-residents. The special provisions ensure that India's tax base is protected from erosion.

      The inclusion of entertainers in the scope of Clause 211 and Section 115BBA (post-2012 amendment) reflects the growing economic significance of entertainment events and performances in India, aligning the tax regime with contemporary realities.

      Historical Context

      Section 115BBA was introduced by the Direct Tax Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 1989, effective from 1 April 1990. It was subsequently amended to include entertainers (Finance Act, 2012) and to update tax rates. The new Income Tax Bill, 2025, through Clause 211, seeks to carry forward this framework into a restructured code, with certain refinements and clarifications.

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 211 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Scope of Taxation

      Clause 211(1) specifies three categories of assessees and the types of income subject to special taxation:

      • Non-resident Sportsmen (including athletes): Taxable on income received/receivable from:
        • Participation in India in any game (excluding those where winnings are taxed u/s 194(1) Table: Sl. No. 1) or sport.
        • Advertisements.
        • Contribution of articles relating to any game or sport in India in newspapers, magazines, or journals.
      • Non-resident Sports Associations or Institutions: Taxable on any amount guaranteed to be paid/payable in relation to any game (other than those covered u/s 194(1) Table: Sl. No. 1) or sport played in India.
      • Non-resident Entertainers: Taxable on income received/receivable from performances in India.

      The provision thus casts a wide net, covering direct performance income, endorsement revenue, and ancillary income such as writing articles, reflecting the multifaceted ways in which sportsmen and entertainers monetize their presence in India.

      2. Exclusion of Certain Games

      Both Clause 211 and Section 115BBA exclude games where winnings are subject to separate taxation (u/s 194(1) Table: Sl. No. 1 in the Bill, and section 115BB in the Income-tax Act, 1961). This typically covers lotteries, betting, and gambling, which are taxed at higher rates under special provisions.

      3. Computation of Tax Liability

      Clause 211 prescribes a two-step computation:

      1. Special Income: Income referred to in clause (a), (b), or (c) is taxed at 20%.
      2. Other Income: The remaining total income (if any) is taxed at normal rates.

      The aggregate of these two amounts constitutes the total tax liability. This dual structure ensures that special income is ring-fenced and taxed at a flat rate, while other income (if any) is taxed as per the applicable slab or rates.

      4. Disallowance of Deductions

      Clause 211(2) categorically denies any deduction for expenditure or allowance in computing the income referred to in sub-section (1). This is a crucial anti-avoidance measure, precluding arguments over the deductibility of expenses such as agent fees, travel, or accommodation, which could otherwise substantially reduce the taxable base.

      5. Exemption from Return Filing

      Clause 211(3) provides that an assessee is not required to file a return of income u/s 263(1) if:

      • The total income consists only of income referred to in sub-section (1); and
      • Tax deductible at source (TDS) under Chapter XIX-B has been duly deducted.

      This provision is designed to ease compliance for non-residents whose India-sourced income is fully subject to TDS and who have no other Indian income.

      6. Table of Tax Rates

      The Table under Clause 211 prescribes a flat 20% tax on specified income, mirroring the rate u/s 115BBA (post-2012 amendment). The clarity of this tabular presentation aids in straightforward computation.

      7. Procedural and Structural Changes

      While the substance of Clause 211 closely tracks Section 115BBA, there are differences in referencing (e.g., section 194(1) in the Bill vs. section 115BB in the Income-tax Act, 1961), reflecting the restructuring and renumbering of the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The language is also updated for clarity and alignment with the new code's drafting style.

      Practical Implications

      1. Impact on Non-resident Sportsmen and Entertainers

      The flat 20% tax rate, with no allowance for deductions, means that the effective tax burden can be significant, particularly for those with high expenses. Non-resident sportsmen and entertainers must ensure that their contracts and payment arrangements account for this withholding, as the law provides little scope for tax planning or reduction.

      2. Impact on Sports Associations and Event Organizers

      Indian sports associations, event organizers, and sponsors must ensure compliance with TDS obligations under Chapter XIX-B. Failure to deduct and remit tax can result in disallowance of expenses and imposition of interest and penalties.

      3. Compliance Simplification

      The exemption from return filing for non-residents whose income is fully subject to TDS is a welcome simplification, reducing administrative burdens and aligning with international best practices for source-based taxation.

      4. Revenue Assurance

      For the tax authorities, these provisions ensure a steady and predictable stream of revenue from high-profile international events, reducing the risk of under-reporting or base erosion.

      5. Treaty Considerations

      India's tax treaties may override domestic law in certain cases, particularly where the treaty restricts the scope of source-based taxation or prescribes a lower rate. However, most treaties allow India to tax performance and endorsement income of non-residents, subject to specified conditions.

      Comparative Analysis: Clause 211 vs. section 115BBA

      1. Structural Parity

      Both Clause 211 and Section 115BBA are substantively similar, reflecting legislative continuity:

      • Scope of Income: Both cover non-resident sportsmen, sports associations, and (post-2012) entertainers, taxing participation, advertisements, and article contributions.
      • Exclusion of Certain Games: Both exclude games where winnings are taxed under a separate provision (section 115BB in the Income tax Act, 1961; section 194(1) Table: Sl. No. 1 in the Bill).
      • Tax Rate: Both prescribe a 20% flat rate (raised from 10% in 2012).
      • Disallowance of Deductions: Both deny deductions for expenses or allowances in computing the special income.
      • Return Filing Exemption: Both exempt non-residents from filing returns if their income is fully subject to TDS and consists only of the specified income.

      2. Differences and Evolution

      • Referencing and Drafting: Clause 211 updates references to align with the new Income Tax Bill, 2025 (e.g., section 194(1) instead of section 115BB), and employs contemporary drafting language.
      • Tabular Presentation: Clause 211 uses a table to specify the tax rate, enhancing clarity.
      • Procedural Alignment: The exemption from return filing refers to section 263(1) in the Bill, corresponding to section 139(1) in the of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
      • Chapter Reference: TDS compliance is linked to Chapter XIX-B in the Bill, replacing Chapter XVII-B in the Income-tax Act, 1961.
      • Potential for Future Amendments: The new code may provide greater flexibility for future amendments, as it is drafted with modern legislative techniques.

      3. Unique Features

      The inclusion of entertainers (since 2012) reflects India's recognition of the economic impact of international entertainment events. The special provisions for article contributions acknowledge the diverse revenue streams of sportsmen and entertainers.

      4. Ambiguities and Issues

      • Definition of 'Entertainer': Neither provision defines "entertainer" exhaustively, potentially leading to interpretative disputes.
      • Scope of 'Participation': The term "participation" may raise questions in cases of virtual events or remote involvement.
      • Overlap with Other Provisions: Care must be taken to avoid double taxation where income could fall under multiple heads (e.g., winnings vs. participation fees).

      5. International Comparison

      Many jurisdictions (e.g., the United States, the United Kingdom) have similar source-based taxation regimes for non-resident entertainers and sportsmen. India's approach is consistent with international practices, though the flat rate and denial of deductions can be more stringent than some counterparts, who may allow limited expense deductions.

      Conclusion

      Clause 211 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a direct continuation and modernization of the regime established by section 115BBA of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It preserves the policy focus on efficient, source-based taxation of non-resident sportsmen, sports associations, and entertainers, while updating procedural references and clarifying computation mechanisms. The flat rate structure, denial of deductions, and exemption from return filing collectively enhance administrative simplicity and revenue assurance, albeit at the cost of flexibility for affected taxpayers.

      As India continues to host high-profile international sporting and entertainment events, these provisions will remain critical in ensuring equitable and effective taxation. The transition to the new code offers an opportunity for further refinement, particularly in addressing definitional ambiguities and aligning with evolving global tax standards.


      Full Text:

      Clause 211 Tax on non-resident sportsmen or sports associations.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax