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

      Determination of Tonnage for Shipping Companies under Indian Tax Law : Clause 227(9) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 115VX of the Income Tax Act, 1961

      28 May, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 227 Computation of tonnage income.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Introduction

      Clause 227(9) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 115VX of the Income Tax Act, 1961, both address the determination of the tonnage of ships and inland vessels for the purposes of the tonnage tax regime. The tonnage tax system provides a special method of computing profits for shipping companies, diverging from the conventional income computation under the Income Tax Act. Instead of taxing actual profits, the regime taxes notional income based on the net tonnage of ships operated by qualifying companies. This system is intended to enhance the global competitiveness of Indian shipping companies, provide fiscal certainty, and align the Indian tax regime with international practices.

      Clause 227(9) is a part of a broader legislative overhaul proposed in the Income Tax Bill, 2025, which seeks to modernize and consolidate the law. Section 115VX, on the other hand, is an existing provision under Chapter XII-G of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which introduced and governs the tonnage tax scheme in India. Both provisions are fundamentally similar in their structure and objective, but a detailed analysis is necessary to highlight nuances, legislative intent, and practical implications for stakeholders.

      2. Objective and Purpose

      Legislative Intent and Policy Considerations

      The primary objective of both Clause 227(9) and Section 115VX is to provide a clear, uniform, and objective method for determining the tonnage of ships and inland vessels for the computation of tonnage income. The rationale is to ensure certainty, minimize disputes, and align Indian law with international conventions and best practices.

      • Certainty and Uniformity: By linking the determination of tonnage to certificates issued under internationally recognized conventions and domestic statutes, the provisions reduce the scope for subjective interpretations and administrative discretion.
      • Alignment with International Practice: The use of certificates under the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969, and the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, ensures that Indian law is in harmony with international norms, facilitating global operations for Indian shipping companies.
      • Facilitation of the Tonnage Tax Regime: The tonnage tax regime is designed to provide a simplified and predictable tax environment for shipping companies, thereby encouraging investment, fleet expansion, and the development of India as a maritime hub.
      • Inclusion of Inland Vessels: The explicit inclusion of inland vessels (especially after the Inland Vessels Act, 2021) reflects the government's intent to broaden the scope of the tonnage tax regime, recognizing the growing importance of inland water transport.

      3. Detailed Analysis of Clause 227(9)

      Breakdown and Interpretation

      1. Sub-clause (a): Tonnage Determination by Certificate
        The tonnage of a ship or inland vessel is to be determined strictly as per the certificate indicating its tonnage. This removes any room for alternative methods of measurement or estimation, ensuring objectivity and consistency.
      2. Sub-clause (b): Definition of "Valid Certificate"
        • (i) Ships Registered in India
          • (A) Length less than 24 metres: Certificate under the Merchant Shipping (Tonnage Measurement of Ship) Rules, 1987, made under the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958.
          • (B) Length 24 metres or more: International tonnage certificate under the Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969, as specified in the same Rules.
        • (ii) Ships Registered Outside India
          Such ships must have a licence from the Director-General of Shipping u/ss 406 or 407 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1958. The licence must specify net tonnage based on a Tonnage Certificate from the Flag State Administration, or any other evidence acceptable to the Director-General of Shipping.
        • (iii) Inland Vessels Registered in India
          The tonnage is determined by a certificate issued under the Inland Vessels Act, 2021.

      Key Features and Legal Principles

      • Reliance on Statutory Certificates: The provision mandates reliance on statutory certificates, thus limiting disputes regarding tonnage computation and providing legal certainty.
      • International and Domestic Compliance: By referencing both domestic and international certificates, the provision caters to the needs of both Indian and foreign-registered vessels operating in India.
      • Administrative Discretion: For foreign ships, the Director-General of Shipping is vested with limited discretion to accept alternative evidence if the standard certificates are unavailable, but this discretion is circumscribed and subject to regulatory oversight.
      • Inclusion of Inland Vessels: The explicit inclusion of inland vessels and reference to the Inland Vessels Act, 2021, marks a progressive step in broadening the regime.

      Ambiguities and Potential Issues

      • Discretion in Accepting Evidence: The phrase "any other evidence acceptable to the Director-General of Shipping" for foreign ships introduces some subjectivity, which could potentially lead to inconsistent application unless further clarified by rules or guidelines.
      • Overlap of Regulatory Jurisdiction: The provision references multiple statutes (Merchant Shipping Act, 1958; Inland Vessels Act, 2021), which may lead to jurisdictional overlaps, especially for vessels operating in both inland and coastal waters.
      • Update and Harmonization: The reference to the Merchant Shipping (Tonnage Measurement of Ship) Rules, 1987, presumes that these rules will remain unchanged. Any amendment to the underlying rules could necessitate corresponding legislative updates.

      4. Practical Implications

      For Shipping Companies

      • Compliance Certainty: Companies can structure their operations and tax planning with certainty, relying on the tonnage as certified by competent authorities.
      • Ease of Documentation: The requirement of statutory certificates simplifies documentation and reduces the compliance burden, as these certificates are already required for regulatory purposes.
      • Potential for Disputes: Limited to cases where certificates are absent, ambiguous, or where alternative evidence is submitted for foreign ships.

      For Tax Authorities

      • Objective Assessment: Tax officers are bound to accept the tonnage as per the valid certificate, reducing scope for arbitrary assessments.
      • Verification: The main task is to verify the authenticity and validity of certificates, rather than engage in technical measurement.

      For Regulators (DG Shipping, etc.)

      • Central Role: The Director-General of Shipping plays a pivotal role in certifying and, where necessary, accepting alternative evidence for foreign ships.
      • Need for Clear Guidelines: To ensure uniformity and avoid allegations of arbitrariness, regulators may need to issue detailed guidelines on what constitutes "acceptable" alternative evidence.

      For Inland Water Transport Operators

      • Inclusion in Tonnage Tax Regime: Operators of inland vessels are explicitly brought within the regime, providing them with potential tax benefits and compliance obligations similar to ocean-going shipping companies.

      5. Comparative Analysis: Clause 227(9) vs. Section 115VX

      AspectSection 115VX of the Income Tax Act, 1961Clause 227(9) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
      ApplicabilityShips and, post-amendment, inland vessels for tonnage tax schemeShips and inland vessels; explicitly covers both categories
      Definition of Valid CertificateSpecifies certificates under Merchant Shipping Act, 1958, and Inland Vessels Act, 2021Repeats same requirements, consolidates language for clarity
      Ships <24m (India)Certificate under Merchant Shipping (Tonnage Measurement of Ship) Rules, 1987Same
      Ships >=24m (India)International tonnage certificate under 1969 Convention, as per 1987 RulesSame
      Ships Registered Outside IndiaLicence by DG Shipping under s.406/407, with Flag State certificate or other evidenceSame, with slightly more explicit language on acceptable evidence
      Inland VesselsCertificate under Inland Vessels Act, 2021 (post-2025 amendment)Same
      Discretion to DG ShippingPermits "any other evidence acceptable to DG Shipping"Same
      ConsolidationSeparate section; earlier only ships, now includes inland vesselsIntegrated in a new, comprehensive provision

      Substantive Differences and Similarities

      • Substantial Parity: Both provisions are almost identical in substance and language, reflecting a deliberate legislative decision to retain the existing framework for tonnage determination in the new Bill.
      • Inclusion of Inland Vessels: Section 115VX was amended by the Finance Act, 2025, to include inland vessels, effective 01-04-2026, whereas Clause 227(9) incorporates this inclusion ab initio. This harmonizes the coverage under both regimes.
      • Administrative Discretion: Both provisions vest discretion in the DG Shipping to accept alternative evidence for foreign ships, ensuring practical flexibility.
      • Legal Certainty: Both provisions provide for legal certainty by relying on statutory certificates, reducing potential for disputes.

      Contextual Differences

      • Legislative Context:Clause 227(9) is part of a comprehensive new Income Tax Bill, intended to replace and modernize the Income Tax Act, 1961. Section 115VX remains operative until the new Bill comes into force.
      • Structural Placement: Clause 227(9) is situated within a broader, restructured framework for computation of tonnage income, whereas Section 115VX is located within Chapter XII-G, which is specifically dedicated to the tonnage tax scheme.

      Potential Conflicts or Overlaps

      • Transitional Issues: During the transition from the 1961 Act to the new Bill, there may be some confusion or overlap regarding the applicability of the two provisions, especially for assessment years straddling the commencement date.
      • Consistency in Interpretation: Given the near-identical language, judicial and administrative interpretations u/s 115VX are likely to be relevant and persuasive for Clause 227(9), ensuring continuity in legal principles.

      6. Comparative Analysis with International Practice

      The reliance on international certificates (such as those issued under the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969) aligns Indian law with prevailing global standards. Many maritime nations adopt similar approaches in their tonnage tax regimes, using internationally recognized certificates for determining net tonnage. This harmonization facilitates international operations, reduces compliance barriers, and enhances the competitiveness of Indian shipping companies.

      7. Conclusion

      Clause 227(9) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a continuation and consolidation of the principles enshrined in Section 115VX of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Both provisions are designed to foster certainty, objectivity, and international alignment in the determination of tonnage for the purposes of the tonnage tax regime. The explicit inclusion of inland vessels reflects the evolving scope of the Indian shipping industry and the government's intent to provide a level playing field for all operators.

      While both provisions are largely identical, the transition to the new Bill offers an opportunity for further clarification, especially regarding the exercise of discretion by the Director-General of Shipping and the harmonization of procedures across different classes of vessels. Stakeholders should monitor subsequent rules and administrative guidelines to ensure smooth implementation and minimize disputes.


      Full Text:

      Clause 227 Computation of tonnage income.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax