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
    Judicial and Legislative Perspectives on Mens Rea in Income Tax Prosecutions :Clause 490 of the Inco...
    Presumptions in Tax Offence Prosecutions : Clause 489 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 278D ...
    Karta and Member Liability for Tax Offences : Clause 488 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 27...
    Directors' and Officers' Liability for Corporate Tax Offences : Clause 487 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Balancing Deterrence and Fairness : Clause 486 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 278AA of Income-...
    Enhanced Penalties for Repeat Tax Offenders specified under Indian Tax Law: Clause 485 of the Income...
    Penal Provision for abetment in relation to the making and delivering of false returns - Clause 484 ...
    Penal Provision for Offences Relating to Falsification of Books in Indian Tax Law : Clause 483 of th...
    Prosecution for False Verification under Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 482 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penal Provisions for Failure to Produce Accounts and Documents : Clause 481 of the Income Tax Bill, ...
    Penal Provision for Failure to Furnish Return in Search Cases : Clause 480 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Penal Provisions for Failure to File Income Tax Returns : Clause 479 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Criminal Liability for Tax Evasion in India : Clause 478 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 27...
    Criminal Liability for TCS Defaults : Clause 477 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 vs. Section 276BB of Incom...
    Criminal Liability for TDS Defaults : Clause 476 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 276B of th...
    Evolution of Statutory Offences Against Tax Recovery in India : Clause 475 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Penal Provisions for Non-Compliance during Tax Inspections : Clause 474 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025...
    Penal Consequences for Non-Compliance with Tax Authority Orders : Clause 473 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Redefining the Bar of Limitation for Tax Penalties : Clause 472 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...
    Natural Justice and Administrative Oversight in Tax Penalties : Clause 471 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption of culpable mental state shifts evidentiary burden to accused to disprove intent beyond reasonable doubt.
    Clause 490 mandates that once the prosecution establishes the actus reus, the court shall presume the existence of a culpable mental state-broadly defined to include intention, motive, knowledge, belief and reason to believe-and permits the accused to rebut that presumption only by proving absence of such mental state beyond reasonable doubt.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption regarding assets and documents found in searches shifts evidentiary burden, now including virtual digital assets.
    Clause 489 creates a rebuttable presumption that assets (including virtual digital assets) and books or documents found in a person's possession during an authorised search, or received via requisition, are presumed to belong to that person and that documents' contents are true when tendered in prosecution, applied "so far as may be" by reference to the Bill's presumption provision and extending to other persons identified by the Bill's connected-person provision.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Presumption of karta guilt shifts evidential burden, requiring demonstration of due diligence to avoid prosecution.
    Clause 488 places primary criminal responsibility on the karta of a Hindu Undivided Family by deeming the karta guilty of an offence by the HUF, subject to statutory defences of lack of knowledge or proof of having exercised all due diligence. It further deems any member guilty where the offence is proved to have been committed with that member's consent or connivance or is attributable to their neglect, creating independent member liability while preserving the karta's available exculpatory defences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Corporate officer liability: deeming provision shifts initial burden to accused, with due diligence defence for tax offences.
    Where a company commits an income-tax offence, the company and every person who was in charge of, and responsible to, the company for the conduct of the business at the time are statutorily deemed guilty and liable to prosecution, subject to a defence that the individual lacked knowledge or exercised all due diligence to prevent the offence; separate liability arises where the offence occurred with the consent, connivance, or neglect of officers, companies are punishable by fine while individuals may face full penal consequences, and definitions explicitly include firms and associations of persons.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable cause defence limits criminal liability for certain tax compliance failures, protecting bona fide taxpayers from prosecution.
    Clause 486 creates a non obstante statutory reasonable cause defence prohibiting punishment for failures under the specified sections of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 when the accused proves reasonable cause. The provision places the burden of proof on the accused, preserves judicial fact specific assessment of reasonable cause, and operates to limit prosecutions for bona fide or uncontrollable lapses while directing enforcement attention to willful or egregious defaults.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Enhanced penalties for repeat tax offences impose mandatory imprisonment and fine upon subsequent convictions under specified tax provisions.
    A prior judicial conviction under any specified income tax offence triggers enhanced punishment: a person again convicted under any of those listed offences is subject to mandatory rigorous imprisonment and a mandatory fine, regardless of whether the subsequent conviction is for the same or a different listed offence; judicial discretion governs the precise sentence within the prescribed range, and the provision applies only after a prior conviction, not mere charge or prosecution.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Abetment of false returns: broadened criminal exposure for facilitators with mandatory imprisonment and fines for culpable conduct.
    Clause 484 criminalises abetment or inducement in making or delivering false tax-related statements, requiring that the abettor know the falsity or not believe the statement to be true. Punishment is tiered by the quantum sought to be evaded, with mandatory minimum imprisonment terms and fines, while procedural details and definitions such as "induce" are not specified, raising interpretive and evidentiary challenges. The clause mirrors prior law's structure but broad wording could implicate advisors and intermediaries absent judicial or legislative clarification.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Falsification of accounting records: criminal liability for wilful false entries intended to enable another person to evade tax.
    Clause 483 makes it an offence to wilfully make or cause false entries in books of account or other documents with intent to enable another person to evade tax, interest, or penalty; it requires proof of wilful conduct and intent but not proof that the beneficiary actually evaded liability, covers physical and electronic records relevant to tax proceedings, and prescribes rigorous imprisonment and a fine.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    False verification offences: criminal liability requires proved knowledge or recklessness, with graded imprisonment and mandatory fines.
    The provision criminalises making false statements in any statutory verification or delivering false accounts where the person knows or believes the statement to be false or does not believe it to be true. Prosecution must prove this mental element beyond reasonable doubt. A graded penalty applies according to the financial impact of the falsity: substantial evasion attracts a higher term of rigorous imprisonment while other cases attract a lower term, and a fine is mandatorily imposed in addition to imprisonment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Willful failure to produce accounts triggers criminal liability including imprisonment and mandatory fine under the new tax provision.
    Clause 481 establishes a penal offence for willful failure to produce accounts and documents called for by a notice under section 268(1), or willful non compliance with a direction under section 268(5), punishable by rigorous imprisonment for up to one year and liability to fine, with criminal prosecution requiring proof of willfulness beyond reasonable doubt and adherence to procedural safeguards; the clause mirrors prior law while leaving the fine quantum unspecified and raising interpretative issues regarding the threshold for willfulness and potential overlap with other provisions.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Wilful failure to furnish return in search cases creates criminal liability, exposing taxpayers to imprisonment and fines.
    Clause 480 penalises a person who, following a search and pursuant to a notice under section 294(1)(a), wilfully fails to furnish a return of income within the prescribed time. The provision requires proof of deliberate non compliance, treats the offence as criminal, and prescribes imprisonment along with a court levied fine, while prosecutions remain subject to ordinary criminal procedure and due process safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Willful failure to file returns attracts graded criminal penalties including imprisonment and fine; an extended cure period limits prosecutions.
    Clause 479 criminalizes the willful failure to furnish returns of income, applying to statutory filing obligations and notice-triggered duties, and establishes a graded criminal penalty regime tied to the tax that would have been evaded. It preserves a mens rea requirement, mandates imprisonment and fine across tiers, and provides exemptions including a one-year cure period to avoid prosecution and a de minimis exception for non-corporate taxpayers, while raising interpretative issues on the definition of wilfulness and calculation of evaded tax.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Wilful tax evasion criminalisation: updated offence framework tightens penalties and preserves additional monetary sanctions for deliberate under-reporting.
    Clause 478 establishes an offence of wilful attempt to evade tax, penalty, or interest, including under-reporting, distinguishing evasion of liability from evasion of payment. It prescribes graded sentences with discretionary fines and makes offenders liable to any other penalties under the Act. The provision's inclusive definition-false entries, false statements, wilful omissions, and other enabling circumstances-broadens prosecutorial scope while retaining the requirement to prove mens rea and preserving procedural safeguards for prosecution.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to remit tax collected at source: criminal liability retained with a filing linked safe harbour to encourage timely compliance.
    Clause 477 criminalizes failure to remit tax collected at source, adopting a strict liability approach that imposes custodial sentence and fine while offering a statutory safe harbour where TCS is deposited on or before the time prescribed for filing the TCS statement, thereby aligning penal consequences and procedural exemption with the existing framework.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Criminal liability for failure to remit TDS expands enforcement and broadens managerial responsibility, with strict penalties.
    Clause 476 criminalizes failure to deposit taxes deducted or collected at source under Chapter XIX-B, extending liability to those who "pay or ensure payment" and prescribing rigorous imprisonment and fine. A proviso bars prosecution if the tax is credited to the Central Government on or before the time prescribed for filing the relevant TDS statement, while cross references to notes and tables expand the catalogue of covered transactions and may complicate interpretation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Fraudulent asset dissipation criminalized: intent-based offence bars transfers aimed at defeating prescribed tax recovery proceedings.
    Clause 475 penalizes the fraudulent removal, concealment, transfer, or delivery of any property or interest with the intent to prevent it from being taken in execution of a prescribed recovery certificate, requiring proof of deceitful intent and applying to tangible and intangible interests; it retains the punitive framework of rigorous imprisonment and fine while replacing an explicit Second Schedule reference with a flexible "as prescribed" linkage to recovery procedures.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to provide inspection facilities criminalises obstruction during tax inspections, attracting imprisonment and fine under the new bill.
    Clause 474 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, makes it an offence to fail to afford an authorised officer the necessary facility to inspect books of account or other documents under section 247(1)(b)(ii), punishable with rigorous imprisonment for up to two years and a fine. The clause largely mirrors Section 275B of the 1961 Act, raises interpretive issues about the definition of "necessary facility" and mens rea, and creates potential overlaps with other penal provisions, while preserving continuity in enforcement policy.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Contravention of tax authority orders may attract imprisonment and fine under the new income tax framework.
    Clause 473 establishes an offence for contravening orders under section 247(1)(viii) or (4), penalising such contraventions with rigorous imprisonment up to the statutory maximum and a fine. The clause focuses on breaches concerning custody, retention, or handling of assets or records during investigative processes. It does not specify mens rea or procedural attributes such as cognizability or bailability, so application and defences will be shaped by judicial interpretation and the Bill's broader procedural framework.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation period for tax penalties: quarter based uniform timeline aligns penalty orders with assessment and appellate outcomes.
    Clause 472 standardises the limitation for imposing tax penalties by prescribing a uniform six month period measured from the end of the quarter tied to the completion of proceedings, appellate or revisional orders, or issuance of a penalty notice; it permits revision of penalty orders to reflect subsequent assessment modifications, mandates a reasonable opportunity to be heard before adverse penalty action, and excludes rehearing and judicial stay periods from limitation computation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax penalties: hearing rights and hierarchical approval govern imposition and administrative oversight under new bill.
    Clause 471 requires that no penalty be imposed without the assessee being heard or given a reasonable opportunity, mandates prior Joint Commissioner approval for penalties exceeding specified officer thresholds, and requires that penalty orders passed by authorities other than the Assessing Officer be sent to the Assessing Officer. It mirrors core safeguards of the existing law but omits scheme enabling provisions for faceless, technology driven procedures and transitional rules, creating potential uncertainties over thresholds, definition of reasonable opportunity, procedural delays, and modernization.

    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

      Comprehensive Review of the Tonnage Tax Scheme : Clause 226(7) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 115VF of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      10 May, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 226 Tonnage tax scheme.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Introduction

      Clause 226(7) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 115VF of the Income-tax Act, 1961 both address the computation and taxation of income for shipping companies under the specialized "tonnage tax scheme." The tonnage tax regime represents a significant policy choice, designed to encourage the growth and competitiveness of the Indian shipping industry by providing a simplified and predictable method of income computation, distinct from the traditional net profit-based taxation.

      This commentary provides a comprehensive analysis of Clause 226(7), including its context, objectives, detailed provisions, practical implications, and a comparative evaluation with the existing Section 115VF. The analysis draws attention to the legislative intent, interpretive nuances, and possible areas of convergence and divergence between the two regimes.

      2. Objective and Purpose

      2.1 Legislative Intent

      The core objective of both Clause 226(7) and Section 115VF is to provide a favorable and simplified tax regime for shipping companies, recognizing the unique nature of their business operations. The tonnage tax scheme (TTS) enables qualifying shipping companies to compute their taxable income based on the net tonnage of ships operated, rather than on actual profits, thereby offering certainty, reducing compliance burden, and enhancing international competitiveness.

      This approach aligns with international best practices, especially in jurisdictions with significant maritime interests, and is a response to the global mobility of shipping operations. The legislative intent is to make India an attractive base for shipping companies, reduce the risk of profit shifting, and ensure a stable revenue stream for the exchequer.

      2.2 Policy Considerations and Historical Background

      The tonnage tax regime was first introduced in India through Chapter XII-G (Sections 115V to 115VZC) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, effective from assessment year 2005-06. The regime was modeled after similar schemes in Europe and Asia, aiming to arrest the declining trend of Indian ships in global trade and to counter the flight of shipping companies to more tax-friendly jurisdictions.

      The Income Tax Bill, 2025 seeks to modernize and consolidate tax provisions, including those relating to tonnage tax, and Clause 226(7) is part of this effort to provide clarity and continuity to the shipping sector.

      3. Detailed Analysis of Clause 226(7) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      3.1 Structure and Key Provisions

      Clause 226(7) reads as follows:

      Subject to the other provisions of this Part,-
      1. the tonnage income, shall be-
        1. computed as per section 227; and
        2. deemed to be the profits chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession"; and
      2. the relevant shipping income referred to in section 228(1) shall not be chargeable to tax.

      This provision is embedded within a comprehensive framework (Clause 226(1)-(6)), which sets out the scope, eligibility, and procedural requirements of the tonnage tax scheme. Sub-clause (7) specifically addresses the computation and taxability of "tonnage income" and the exemption of "relevant shipping income."

      3.2 Breakdown and Interpretation

      • Computation as per Section 227:

        Clause 226(7)(a)(i) mandates that the "tonnage income" must be computed in accordance with Section 227. Although Section 227 is not reproduced here, it is expected to lay down the methodology for calculating notional income based on net tonnage, similar to the detailed computation mechanism u/s 115VG of the 1961 Act. This ensures that the tonnage tax scheme remains formulaic and not profit-based.

      • Deemed Profits:

        Clause 226(7)(a)(ii) provides that the tonnage income so computed shall be deemed to be the profits chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession." This legal fiction is critical, as it allows the tonnage income to be taxed under the regular business income head, while separating it from actual accounting profits. This approach simplifies tax administration and provides certainty to taxpayers.

      • Exclusion of Relevant Shipping Income:

        Clause 226(7)(b) stipulates that "the relevant shipping income referred to in section 228(1) shall not be chargeable to tax." This means that once a shipping company opts for the tonnage tax scheme, and its income is computed on a notional basis, the actual income derived from shipping operations (as defined in Section 228(1)) is excluded from the tax base, preventing double taxation and ensuring the integrity of the tonnage tax regime.

      3.3 Legislative Safeguards

      Clause 226(7) is "subject to the other provisions of this Part," indicating that the computation and exemption are not absolute but are contingent on compliance with the broader eligibility, option, and procedural requirements set out in the preceding and succeeding clauses. This includes the need for a valid option (as per Section 231), qualifying ship criteria, and the separation of tonnage tax business from other activities.

      3.4 Ambiguities and Interpretive Issues

      While the language of Clause 226(7) is largely clear, potential ambiguities may arise concerning:

      • The precise scope of "relevant shipping income" u/s 228(1), especially if the definition is expanded or altered from the 1961 Act.
      • Interaction with other tax provisions, such as Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) or provisions relating to international shipping income.
      • Procedural safeguards to prevent abuse or misclassification of income.

      4. Practical Implications

      4.1 Impact on Stakeholders

      • Shipping Companies:

        The tonnage tax scheme continues to offer shipping companies a predictable, low-compliance, and competitive tax regime. By taxing notional income based on net tonnage, companies are insulated from volatile profits and complex accounting adjustments. The exclusion of actual relevant shipping income from tax further incentivizes participation in the scheme.

      • Tax Authorities:

        The regime simplifies tax administration, reduces litigation over allowable expenses and depreciation, and provides a stable revenue stream. However, tax authorities must remain vigilant against attempts to misclassify income or artificially inflate qualifying tonnage.

      • Regulators and Policy Makers:

        The continuity of the tonnage tax regime signals policy stability, which is critical for long-term investment decisions in shipping. However, there remains a need for periodic review to ensure that the scheme remains aligned with international developments and does not become a vehicle for tax avoidance.

      4.2 Compliance and Procedural Aspects

      Companies must ensure strict compliance with the eligibility conditions, option procedures, and record-keeping requirements. The separation of tonnage tax business from other activities requires robust internal controls and accounting segregation. Any deviation may result in loss of scheme benefits and reversion to standard profit-based taxation.

      5. Comparative Analysis with Section 115VF of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      5.1 Textual Comparison

      Section 115VF of the Income-tax Act, 1961 states:

      Subject to the other provisions of this Chapter, the tonnage income shall be computed in accordance with section 115VG and the income so computed shall be deemed to be the profits chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" and the relevant shipping income referred to in sub-section (1) of section 115V-I shall not be chargeable to tax.

      A side-by-side comparison reveals that Clause 226(7) essentially mirrors the substance of Section 115VF, with only minor differences in cross-references (i.e., Section 227 vs. Section 115VG; Section 228(1) vs. Section 115V-I(1)), which are a result of the restructuring and renumbering in the new Bill.

      5.2 Substantive Parity

      • Computation Mechanism:

        Both provisions anchor the computation of tonnage income to a separate section (Section 227/115VG), which prescribes the detailed methodology. The legal fiction of "deemed profits" is maintained in both, ensuring continuity in the tax treatment.

      • Exclusion of Actual Shipping Income:

        Both provisions categorically exclude the actual "relevant shipping income" from tax once the tonnage tax scheme is opted for, thereby avoiding double taxation and maintaining the integrity of the notional income approach.

      • Conditional Applicability:

        The phrase "subject to the other provisions of this Part/Chapter" is present in both, underscoring that the benefit is not unconditional but subject to compliance with eligibility, option, and procedural requirements.

      5.3 Differences and Evolution

      • Reorganization and Modernization:

        The Income Tax Bill, 2025 reorganizes and modernizes tax provisions, including tonnage tax, for clarity and accessibility. While the substantive content is unchanged, the new structure may facilitate easier reference and compliance.

      • Potential for Expanded Definitions:

        The Bill provides an opportunity to update definitions and computation methods to reflect changes in shipping practices (e.g., inclusion of inland vessels, slot/space charters). Any such changes would be reflected in the cross-referenced sections (Section 227, 228), and not in Clause 226(7) directly.

      5.4 International Context and Comparison

      The Indian tonnage tax regime, as reflected in both the 1961 Act and the 2025 Bill, is consistent with international models prevalent in the UK, EU, Singapore, and other maritime jurisdictions. The legal fiction of "deemed profits" and the exclusion of actual income are standard features globally, designed to provide certainty and prevent disputes over expense allocation and transfer pricing.

      5.5 Potential Issues and Conflicts

      • Interaction with Other Tax Provisions:

        Issues may arise regarding the interaction of tonnage tax provisions with MAT, transfer pricing, or anti-avoidance rules. The legislative framework must ensure that the notional nature of tonnage income is respected across other tax computations.

      • Ambiguity in Definitions:

        Any change in the definition of "qualifying ship," "relevant shipping income," or "operating a ship" could have significant implications. The Bill's approach to these definitions must be carefully harmonized with the intent and structure of the tonnage tax regime.

      6. Conclusion

      Clause 226(7) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 represents a continuation and reaffirmation of the tonnage tax regime for shipping companies, as established under Section 115VF of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The provision maintains the core features of notional income computation, legal fiction of deemed profits, and exclusion of actual shipping income, thereby ensuring policy continuity and stability for the shipping sector. The restructuring in the Bill does not alter the substantive rights or obligations of taxpayers but may enhance clarity and compliance.

      For stakeholders, the regime remains attractive and internationally competitive, but careful attention must be paid to compliance, evolving definitions, and the interaction with other tax provisions. Periodic review and judicial clarification may be warranted to address emerging issues and to ensure that the regime continues to serve its intended purpose without being susceptible to abuse.


      Full Text:

      Clause 226 Tonnage tax scheme.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax