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
    NewsBills
    AMENDMENTS IN THE GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Court Upholds Deduction for Operational Hotel under Section 35AD Despite Administrative Delays
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Landmark Ruling: Leasing Businesses Entitled to Depreciation Benefits
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Court Decision on Convertible Debentures Expenses : Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judgement on Feasibility Study Costs on Project Development: Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Section 43B: Supreme Court Decision on Unutilised MODVAT Credit and Sales Tax Recoverable
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Failure to deduct TDS and Disallowance of expenses: Supreme Court Clarifies Retrospective Applicatio...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Deduction of Bad Debts: Supreme Court's Ruling on Section 36 Compliance and alternative claim u/s 37
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Principal-Agent Relationship in Telecom Sector and TDS u/s 194H: A Supreme Court Verdict
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Procedural Compliance vs. Substantive Justice: Balancing Procedural Rigidity and Transitional Hardsh...
    Maximizing Value in Insolvency: NCLAT Upholds CoC's Right to Negotiate Post-Challenge Mechanism
    Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Period for Appeals before NCLAT under IBC in the Digital Age: E-...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Bounds of Tax Law: Supreme Court's Verdict on Section 153-C Assessments
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Delhi High Court's Guiding Light on Post-Search Tax Assessments: Application of Section 153C, po...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Legal and Procedural Hurdles: A Charitable Institution's Quest for Tax Exemption and Regi...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdictional Objections in Tax Assessments: A Landmark Order
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Invalid Notices and the Importance of Proper Jurisdiction: Lessons from a High-Profile Tax Case
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Upholding Precedent: Supreme Court's Stance on Taxation of Cross-Border Software Payments (Royalty)
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Cross-Border Software Purchase Conundrum: Supreme Court's Clarification on TDS for Non-Resident...
    Ensuring Justice in GST Registration Cancellations: A Landmark High Court Ruling
❯❯
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
    NewsBills
    Show AI Summary
    Regularisation of cess shortfalls where non levy arose from general practice allows government to sanction corrective levy.
    Section 8A empowers the government to regularize cases of non-levy or short-levy of the compensation cess where such under-collection arose from a prevailing general practice, providing an administrative mechanism to treat practice-driven cess shortfalls as regularizable liabilities under the GST compensation framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Deduction eligibility for operational hotels affirmed despite administrative delay in star classification, focusing on substantive compliance.
    The court addressed entitlement to a deduction under Section 35AD(5)(aa) where a hotel began operations and generated income in the relevant year and a timely application for star classification was submitted, but formal certification was delayed due to administrative inspections; the court applied a purposive construction to allow the deduction when substantive operational conditions were satisfied and delay was not the assessee's fault.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Depreciation entitlement for leasing companies where contractual ownership and business use are established, allowing higher depreciation rates.
    A lessor retains entitlement to depreciation where lease terms demonstrate exclusive ownership rights, repossession power, return obligations and inspection rights, and where the asset is used in the course of the lessor's leasing business; actual physical use by the lessor is not required. Leasing activity that functionally equates to hiring can qualify assets for an enhanced rate of depreciation despite registration in the lessee's name.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revenue classification of debenture issuance expenses upheld as revenue expenditure despite later conversion into equity.
    Expenses incurred to issue convertible debentures that are raised to provide working capital are to be treated as revenue expenditure because classification depends on the purpose and usage of the expenditure, and future conversion into shares does not change its revenue character.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Classification of feasibility study costs: expansion-related studies without new assets qualify as revenue expenditure.
    Whether feasibility study expenditures are revenue or capital depends on purpose and benefit: costs to obtain an enduring benefit or create a new capital asset are capital; costs incurred to expand the same business, under unity of control and without creation of new assets, are revenue in nature.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 43B actual-payment requirement prevents deduction of unutilised MODVAT credit and sales tax recoverable balances.
    Section 43B permits deduction only for sums payable as tax, duty, cess or fee that are actually paid in the relevant previous year (or paid before the return due date where a statutory liability existed). Unutilised MODVAT credit is an entitlement to adjust future excise liabilities and not an actual payment; sales tax in a recoverable account is a cost adjustment, not discharge of statutory liability. Because no excise liability existed at the relevant year end, the proviso does not apply and such credits do not meet the Section 43B payment requirement for deduction.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective application of curative amendment to TDS deadline clarified, affecting disallowance of expenses under the tax provision.
    The Court addressed whether an amendment extending the time to deposit TDS should be applied retrospectively to govern the operation of a statutory disallowance provision. After reviewing prior amendments, explanatory materials, and precedent on curative measures, the Court characterised the later amendment as curative and directed its retrospective application to the date of insertion of the original provision, thereby affecting the applicability of the disallowance to expenses where TDS was deposited by the extended deadline.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Bad debt deduction criteria clarified under Sections 36 and 37 - stricter substantiation required; capital expenditure excluded.
    Entitlement to a bad debt deduction requires statutory compliance and adequate substantiation; an accounting write off alone does not suffice. The assessee's failure to produce coherent documentary evidence of the nature and terms of the advance, inconsistent characterisation of the payment, and the capital nature of the outflow precluded treatment as a business deduction. The general business expenditure provision does not avail items that are within or expressly excluded by the bad debt framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Commission characterization: discounts to franchisees are sales margins, not commission; therefore no TDS obligation under Section 194-H.
    The Court held that the characterisation of receipts as commission or brokerage under Section 194-H requires agency relationships established by control, fiduciary obligations and the ability to bind the principal. Franchisees/distributors who buy prepaid products at discounts, bear commercial risk, determine resale margins and lack pricing control operate independently. Their discounted purchase price and resale margin constitute sale proceeds, not commission for services rendered on behalf of the provider, and thus do not fall within Section 194-H's withholding obligation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural timelines for charitable registration may be treated as directory to mitigate transitional electronic filing hardships and enable merit review.
    The tribunal treated administrative timeline extensions and electronic-filing difficulties as relevant to construing statutory deadlines for charitable approval, regarding the contested filing timelines as directory rather than strictly mandatory where substantive compliance existed, and directed merit-based reconsideration instead of dismissal solely for technical delay.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    CoC negotiation rights preserved after challenge mechanism, allowing revised proposals to maximize corporate value under insolvency framework.
    The CoC retains authority to negotiate with resolution applicants and to call for revisions to resolution plans post-challenge mechanism to maximize corporate value; Regulation 39(1A) is procedural and does not bar such substantive negotiation, and the conclusion of a challenge mechanism does not vest the highest bidder with an automatic right to approval, leaving the CoC's commercial judgment paramount.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation period for IBC appeals runs from e filing date, with time to obtain certified copies excluded.
    The period for filing an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is to be computed from the date of e filing, with allowance for later submission of a physical copy; time taken to obtain certified copies is excluded from the limitation calculation in line with the Limitation Act, producing a framework harmonising tribunal rules, statutory principles, and technological filing practices.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Incriminating evidence requirement for search-based tax assessments: without it, 153 C assessments fail; reassessment under 147/148 remains possible.
    Assessments under Section 153-C require incriminating material discovered during search and seizure; absent such material, those assessments lack evidentiary foundation and may be set aside, though the Revenue may pursue reassessment under alternate provisions if independent legal grounds exist.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Post-search assessment requires reliance on incriminating material discovered during search to validate reassessment of income.
    Post-search assessments must be founded on incriminating material discovered during the search; reassessments cannot be based on material unconnected to search records. Third party assessments require a demonstrable link between the impugned income and the incriminating material within those records. The court reaffirmed precedent distinguishing ordinary reassessment from search triggered reassessment and directed re determination consistent with those legal principles to preserve procedural fairness.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness: clarifying timing for final registration under section 80G prevents denial for pre approval activities.
    The tribunal identified procedural deficiencies in the tax authority's handling of a charity's final registration application, finding that a single short-notice hearing failed to secure adequate opportunity to be heard and underscoring procedural fairness. It further clarified that provisional approval is a predicate to applying for final registration and that activities begun prior to provisional approval do not automatically preclude later final registration, rejecting a restrictive timing construction and directing fresh consideration consistent with those legal principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional objection waiver: assessee's participation after notice bars later challenge, remedial reassessment permitted within timeframe.
    The Supreme Court held that an assessee who participates in assessment proceedings after receiving an assessment-process notice without timely challenging the assessing officer's jurisdiction is barred from later disputing that jurisdiction under the statutory limitation. It set aside the High Court's order and directed the assessing officer to complete the assessment within a short prescribed timeframe, with the proviso that the assessee may not plead limitation in that completion process.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction in tax assessments: improper issuing authority can invalidate notices and require reissuance by competent authority.
    Jurisdiction in tax assessments was the pivotal issue: the record showed assessment power lay with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), not the subordinate officer who issued the contested notice, rendering that notice issued without jurisdiction. The petition also challenged adherence to principles of natural justice. The court refrained from adjudicating the substantive assessment and demand because those aspects were subject to statutory appeal, distinguishing jurisdictional defects from appealable merits and allowing issuance by the competent authority in conformity with procedural safeguards.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxation of cross border software payments as royalty reinforced; precedent remains binding despite pending review, so withholding obligations persist.
    Supreme Court reaffirmed that payments to non residents for software are to be treated as royalty for withholding tax purposes, holding that a pending review against an earlier precedent does not suspend that precedent's application; procedural limits on review under the Code of Civil Procedure prevent indefinite postponement of settled law, requiring taxpayers and payors in cross border software transactions to comply with prevailing withholding obligations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation of cross-border software dictates TDS obligations based on transaction substance and applicable DTAA.
    Whether payments to non-resident suppliers for computer software constitute royalty and attract TDS depends on the transaction's terms and economic substance; payments reflecting a one-time purchase or transfer of goods do not automatically qualify as royalty. Applicable Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provisions that are more favourable to the taxpayer govern taxability, and withholding obligations arise only if, after applying treaty benefits and examining substance, the payment is chargeable under domestic law or the DTAA.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness: administrative cancellation of registration demands reasoned decision-making to uphold equality and due process protections.
    Procedural fairness in administrative GST cancellations is the central concern: cancellation of a proprietorship's GST registration for non-filing of returns raises whether authorities considered exceptional personal and pandemic-related circumstances before terminating registration and whether orders contain adequate, contemporaneous reasons so that affected persons can understand and challenge the basis of the action.

    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