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

      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