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
    Interpreting "Or": The Disjunctive Mandate for Personal Hearing in Tax Matters
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Registration Process u/s 80G: Insights from the ITAT Ruling
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Ensuring Fair Proceedings: The Importance of Proper Notice Service in Income Tax Matters
    Demarcating Authority: High Court Clarifies Jurisdictional Limits of GST Officers
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Unraveling the Royalty Conundrum and DTAA: ITAT's Stance on Marketing and Reservation Fees
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Royalty or Not? Decoding the Taxability of Marketing and Reservation Contributions under India-USA D...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Unraveling the Intricacies: Assessing a Political Party's Claim for Income Tax Exemption
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Bogus Capital Gains and Accommodation Entries: Unraveling the Penny Stock Scam and Tax Evasion
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Strict Interpretation of Exemption Provisions: Supreme Court's Ruling on Section 10B(8) of the Incom...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance u/s 14A: Prospective or Retrospective Effect of the Amendment?
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of "Charitable Purpose" in Income Tax Exemptions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Cooperative Banks vs. Primary Agricultural Credit Societies: Implications for Section 80P Deduction
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Exemption u/s 11: Condonation of Delay in Filing Form 10
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 249(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act: When Non-Payment of Advance Tax Cannot Dismiss...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Retrospective Amendments and the Doctrine of Vested Rights: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Upholding Equality: HC Strikes Down Discriminatory Circular on Charitable Trust Approvals
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Review of Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) Orders: Navigating the Boundaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessee's Lackadaisical Conduct Leads to Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Appeal Scheme: Lessons from the Judgement on Delayed Filing and Deduction u/...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Unraveling the Maze of Round-Tripping: The Doctrine of "Source of Source" in Share Capital Transacti...
❯❯
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 LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Personal hearing mandate in tax proceedings: failure to afford hearing requires reconsideration and a reasoned decision.
    Section 75(4) of the UPGST Act mandates that an opportunity for personal hearing be granted either upon a written request by the person chargeable with tax or penalty or whenever an adverse decision is contemplated; the disjunctive word "or" must be given its plain meaning, creating independent triggers for the hearing obligation. The court concluded the authorities failed to comply with this requirement and directed that a personal hearing be afforded and a reasoned order issued thereafter to ensure procedural fairness in tax adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 80G registration: provisional approval permits subsequent final registration, with commencement dated from provisional grant.
    The tribunal construed the proviso-based registration mechanism to permit institutions granted provisional approval to apply for final registration, counting the date of commencement of activities from the grant of provisional approval; administrative circulars extending renewal deadlines apply to specified renewal applications and do not curtail the availability of final registration for provisionally approved institutions, while a view excluding applicants who commenced activities prior to provisional approval was considered inconsistent with the proviso scheme.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Proper service of notice: portal-only publication cannot substitute direct communication and mandates a fresh hearing.
    Proper service of notice in income tax proceedings is essential to safeguard the right to be heard and facets of natural justice. Placing notices on an electronic portal without direct communication does not, by itself, satisfy statutory methods of service, and cannot be presumed to give the taxpayer effective notice. Where service in terms of the Act and Rules is not shown, affected parties are entitled to a fair opportunity to file replies and be heard, and the tax administration must provide a fresh hearing and issue an independent speaking order after considering the reply.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional limits of GST officers: no proceedings against assessees assigned to counterpart authority absent cross-empowerment notification.
    The judgement clarifies that appointment and delegation of powers under the Central and State GST regimes are confined to officers appointed under each statute, and that assessees allocated administratively to Central or State authorities may be lawfully proceeded against only by those authorities unless a formal cross-empowerment notification permits otherwise; no general cross-empowerment notification exists except for limited refund purposes.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxability of marketing contributions: non taxable where receipts are fiduciary and subject to mutuality, not royalty.
    Where receipts from hotels are received with a corresponding obligation to expend them for agreed common purposes and are held in a fiduciary capacity, such marketing contributions, reward program receipts, reservation contributions and central reservation system fees are not consideration for use of intellectual property or fees for technical services and thus do not qualify as royalty or fees for included services under the India-US DTAA, particularly in the absence of a permanent establishment and where coordinate precedent on identical facts supports non taxability under the principle of mutuality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterization: marketing and reservation contributions treated as non-royalty under DTAA when tied to agreed-use obligations.
    Whether marketing and reservation contributions from Indian hotels to a US company qualify as Royalty or Fees for Included Services under the India-USA DTAA turns on their substantive nature: the presence of a corresponding contractual obligation to apply funds for agreed marketing, advertising and reservation activities and supporting auditor evidence indicates such receipts are not consideration for making available intellectual property or technical services, distinguishing them from factual scenarios where contributions increase brand value or transfer intangible know how.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 13A compliance: failure to meet proviso conditions bars political party exemption and informs stay assessment approach.
    A registered political party's claim of exemption under Section 13A was rejected for failure to meet proviso conditions, including receipt of donations in breach of the cash donation prohibition; the tribunal treated non exempt voluntary contributions as income from other sources, disallowing deductions; allegations of mala fides were dismissed due to the party's procedural delays; and the tribunal's prima facie framework for stay applications-assessing merits, undue hardship, and likelihood of success-was upheld, with liberty to apply afresh to the tribunal given changed circumstances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Burden of Proof under section sixty eight: genuineness of share transactions must be established or treated as accommodation entries.
    The dispute concerned alleged bogus long term capital gains from penny stock trading characterised as an accommodation entry; revenue contested genuineness, identity and creditworthiness of parties while assessees relied on expert and market information. Applying the doctrine of preponderance of probabilities, the court reiterated that the initial burden to prove identity and genuineness lies with the assessee, criticised inadequate enquiries by authorities, rejected expert and media reliance as a substitute for due diligence, and described the accommodation entry modus operandi leading to findings that the transactions were not satisfactorily proved.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Strict compliance with exemption conditions: declaration and filing deadline mandatory; revised returns cannot introduce new exemption claims.
    The Court held that both conditions for claiming the exemption-furnishing a written declaration to the assessing officer and submitting it before the due date for the original return-are mandatory and must be strictly complied with. It rejected treating the time limit as directory, distinguished deduction-related authorities, and held that a revised return cannot introduce new exemption claims or claim carry-forward benefits not made in the original return.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospectivity of tax amendment: amendment held prospective; prior rule barring disallowance where no exempt income applies.
    The court held that the Finance Act amendment described as "for removal of doubts" cannot be given retrospective effect where it alters prior law; the Finance Bill memorandum fixing commencement determined prospectivity, and existing Division Bench precedent that no disallowance can be made if no exempt income was earned was applied, subject to the ultimate outcome of the pending higher court challenge.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Charitable purpose clarified: statutory public bodies generally exempt; commercial receipts taxed under quantitative proviso, with annual scrutiny required.
    The judgement narrows the scope of charitable purpose under Section 2(15) by treating statutory public utility bodies as generally exempt while excluding income from commercial activities beyond core regulatory or public-interest functions. Trade-promotion and non-statutory bodies may qualify if charges are nominal, but ancillary fee-generating services and high-fee providers produce taxable commercial receipts. Private trusts' advertisement income is commercial. Assessing authorities must perform yearly scrutiny and apply the proviso's quantitative limits to determine exemption eligibility.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Deduction 80P eligibility turns on whether a cooperative society's banking status classifies it as a cooperative bank; AO to verify.
    A cooperative society carrying on deposit-taking and lending, issuing cheques and providing banking services may fall within the banking business definition under the Banking Regulation Act; whether it qualifies as a cooperative bank under that Act-affected by its bye-laws and membership rules-must be determined by fact-specific examination to decide entitlement to the cooperative deduction.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of Delay in Filing Form Ten: reasonable professional oversight accepted, delay condoned and rectification allowed.
    Condonation of delay in filing Form Ten was granted where the auditor's bona fide oversight-reporting accumulation in the audit report (Form Ten B) and misconstruing separate filing requirements-led to a 361 day delay; the court found the lapse inadvertent amid pandemic conditions, accepted the explanation, quashed the refusal order and permitted rectification steps, treating the delay as condoned.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Advance tax obligation: absence of taxable income prevents dismissal of appeal for non-payment of advance tax.
    The Tribunal held that the advance tax payment condition for appeal maintainability applies only when the assessee had a legal obligation to compute and pay advance tax; in the absence of taxable income no such obligation exists, and an appeal cannot be dismissed solely for non-payment of advance tax. The Tribunal directed that the matter proceed to merits with an opportunity to be heard, stressing that the payment requirement must be applied in light of factual circumstances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Vested rights preserved against retrospective tax amendments; filings made before enactment remain effective for settlement consideration.
    The court addressed whether a retrospective Finance Act amendment prohibiting settlement applications from a specified date could divest a taxpayer who filed earlier of its vested right to have the application considered. It held that retrospective legislation cannot take away rights already accrued by actions completed before enactment unless clearly intended; that section 119 confers time-extension power but cannot impose new substantive eligibility conditions; and that administrative delay by revenue does not justify denying access where an application was already filed.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable classification principle: differential deadline for charitable trust tax recognition cannot lack rational basis or equality protection.
    A departmental circular extended a filing deadline for tax recognition to mitigate hardship but excluded newly formed charitable trusts without offering reasons; the exclusion lacked an intelligible differentia and rational nexus to the circular's object, making the differential treatment arbitrary and ultra vires the constitutional guarantee of equality, requiring the excluded applications to be treated as within time and decided on merits.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    ITSC jurisdiction extends beyond application disclosures, while full and true disclosure and narrow judicial review govern settlement oversight.
    The Income Tax Settlement Commission may inquire into and decide issues disclosed in the application and any other matters relating to the case as reflected in the Commissioner's report or uncovered by further inquiry; full and true disclosure is mandatory and amendments or contradictory positions that undermine that requirement are impermissible, yet contesting taxability before the Commission does not automatically negate disclosure; judicial review is limited to statutory contravention, prejudice, fraud, bias or malice, while sufficiency of materials placed before the Commission is generally beyond routine court scrutiny.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Delay condonation denied where litigant's evasive conduct and non participation failed to constitute sufficient cause for appeal filing.
    The court refused condonation of delay for filing an appeal where a best judgment assessment treated cash bank deposits as unexplained after the assessee failed to file returns or participate in proceedings; reliance on transition to a faceless e filing regime and lack of alerts was held insufficient, as the assessee's evasive and habitual non participation did not amount to sufficient cause warranting condonation under the applicable doctrine.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Sufficient cause for delay in filing appeals rejected where faceless scheme migration did not excuse prolonged inaction.
    The court held that migration to a faceless appeal system did not, without persuasive evidence, constitute sufficient cause to condone a lengthy delay in filing an appeal, finding the explanation reflective of litigant inaction rather than unavoidable impediment. On tax deduction, the court applied authority that a non-obstante clause does not negate the employer's obligation to deposit employees' statutory contributions by the due date as a condition for claiming the deduction, and treated the appeal as meritless and barred by limitation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Source of source doctrine used to pierce the corporate veil where share capital appears round tripped among related entities.
    The assessee must prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of investors under section 68; examination extends to the true origin of funds where bank records show circular transfers, related party directorships, lack of business operations, and arbitrary share premium, permitting lifting the corporate veil and application of the source of source doctrine to treat such receipts as not satisfactorily explained.

    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

      Comparative Legal Analysis of Block Period Income Computation : Clause 293 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 158BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      16 June, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 293 Computation of total income of block period.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Introduction

      Clause 293 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, marks a significant legislative initiative in the realm of search and seizure assessments, often referred to as "block assessments." It sets out the modalities for the computation of total income of a "block period" in cases where a search or requisition has been initiated under the special procedure. The provision is intended to replace and modernize the existing framework as provided u/s 158BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which has, for decades, governed the computation of undisclosed income discovered during search and seizure operations.

      The transition from Section 158BB to Clause 293 is not merely a renumbering exercise but reflects a conscious legislative intent to streamline, clarify, and update the assessment process in search cases. This commentary undertakes a detailed clause-by-clause analysis of Clause 293, followed by a comparative evaluation with Section 158BB, highlighting the similarities, differences, and the policy rationale underlying the changes.

      2. Objective and Purpose

      The legislative objective behind Clause 293 is to provide a comprehensive, transparent, and efficient mechanism for computing the total income of an assessee for the block period when a search or requisition has been conducted. The "block period" concept was introduced to address the challenge of assessing undisclosed income unearthed during search operations, which often relates to multiple assessment years. The provision seeks to:

      • Aggregate undisclosed income over a defined period;
      • Ensure that only income not previously assessed or disclosed is subjected to block assessment;
      • Prevent double taxation or omission of income by clearly demarcating what is to be included or excluded from the block assessment;
      • Provide clarity regarding the treatment of losses, set-off, and carry-forward provisions;
      • Align the assessment mechanism with contemporary tax administration needs, including transfer pricing and international transactions.

      The historical context of Section 158BB-introduced as part of the special procedure for search cases-was to provide a deterrent against tax evasion and to expedite the assessment of undisclosed income. Over time, judicial pronouncements and administrative experience exposed certain ambiguities and operational challenges, necessitating legislative refinement.

      3. Detailed Analysis of Clause 293 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      3.1 Sub-section (1): Components of Total Income of Block Period

      Sub-section (1) of Clause 293 lays out a detailed and structured approach for aggregating the total income of the block period. The key components are:

      • (a) Undisclosed income declared in the return u/s 294:
        This includes income voluntarily declared by the assessee in response to the search, ensuring that the process encourages disclosure and compliance.
      • (b) Income assessed under other provisions prior to the search:
        Income already assessed under specified sections (including both the new Act and corresponding sections of the 1961 Act) before the search is included, thereby preventing re-assessment of the same income.
      • (c) Income declared in returns furnished u/s 263 or in response to notice u/s 268(1) or 280:
        This ensures that income declared in compliance with notices or under specific provisions is duly considered, avoiding duplication.
      • (d) Income determined on the basis of books of account and documents:
        This is further divided into three sub-categories, dealing with (i) tax years ended but returns not yet due, (ii) period from 1st April to the date before the search, and (iii) period from date of search to execution of last authorization. The emphasis is on contemporaneous record-keeping and transparency.
      • (e) Undisclosed income determined by the Assessing Officer under sub-section (2):
        This brings within the fold any further undisclosed income unearthed by the Assessing Officer based on evidence or material found during the search or during the assessment proceedings.

      3.2 Sub-section (2): Basis for Computing Undisclosed Income

      This sub-section mandates that undisclosed income is to be computed on the basis of:

      • (a) Evidence found as a result of search, survey, or requisition;
      • (b) Any other material or information available with the Assessing Officer or coming to his notice during proceedings.

      This provision codifies the principle that only income supported by credible evidence or information can be brought to tax, thereby safeguarding against arbitrary assessments.

      3.3 Sub-section (3): Exclusion of International and Specified Domestic Transactions

      This is a nuanced addition that excludes income relating to international transactions or specified domestic transactions (as referred to in section 166) for certain periods from the computation of block period income. Such income is to be assessed under the regular assessment provisions, not under the block assessment. The rationale is to ensure that complex transfer pricing and related party transaction issues are dealt with by specialized assessment mechanisms, maintaining consistency and fairness.

      3.4 Sub-section (4): Special Rules for Firms and Application of Other Provisions

      This sub-section provides:

      • (a) For firms: Income is to be determined before allowing deductions for salary, interest, etc., to non-working partners, ensuring that the block assessment captures the true economic benefit.
      • (b) & (c): The application of other relevant sections (102-105, 166) to the block period, with necessary modifications, ensures that the computation is aligned with the broader tax framework.

      3.5 Sub-section (5): Charging of Tax

      Tax is to be charged on the block period income determined under sub-section (1), after reducing the income already assessed or disclosed under clauses (b), (c), and (d). This avoids double taxation and ensures only "undisclosed" income is taxed at special rates.

      3.6 Sub-section (6): Treatment of Losses

      Losses declared or determined under various clauses of sub-section (1) are to be ignored for the purpose of block assessment. This prevents the misuse of the block assessment mechanism to set off losses against undisclosed income, thereby preserving the deterrent effect.

      3.7 Sub-section (7): Non-Set-Off of Brought Forward Losses and Unabsorbed Depreciation

      Brought forward losses or unabsorbed depreciation from years prior to the block period cannot be set off against undisclosed income determined in the block assessment. However, such losses may be carried forward for set-off in subsequent years, as per sub-section (8).

      3.8 Sub-section (8): Carry Forward of Losses and Unabsorbed Depreciation

      This provision clarifies that losses or unabsorbed depreciation not set off in the block assessment may be carried forward for set-off in years subsequent to the end of the block period, in accordance with the Act.

      4. Practical Implications

      Clause 293 will have far-reaching implications for taxpayers, tax professionals, and the tax administration:

      • Taxpayers: Provides greater clarity on what will be included in the block assessment, reducing litigation and uncertainty. The exclusion of losses and clear rules for carry-forward will impact tax planning and compliance strategies.
      • Tax Administration: Equips officers with a more structured framework, reducing discretionary power and potential for arbitrary assessments.
      • Procedural Impact: The explicit treatment of international and specified domestic transactions ensures that block assessments do not overlap with transfer pricing assessments, thus streamlining the process.
      • Compliance: The requirement for contemporaneous documentation and timely returns is reinforced, incentivizing proper record-keeping.

      5. Comparative Analysis: Clause 293 vs. Section 158BB

      A clause-by-clause comparison reveals both continuity and innovation in the approach to block assessments. The following analysis highlights the key similarities and distinctions:

      5.1 Structure and Aggregation of Income

      • Section 158BB: Focuses on "undisclosed income" of the block period, aggregating income declared in the return (u/s 158BC) and income determined by the Assessing Officer.
      • Clause 293: Expands the scope to aggregate not only undisclosed income but also income assessed or declared under various provisions, with more granular categorization (returns u/s 294, income assessed under other sections, income declared in response to notices, and income determined from books).
      • Analysis: The new provision is more exhaustive, aiming to capture all possible sources and forms of income relevant to the block period, thus reducing ambiguity.

      5.2 Exclusion of Previously Assessed or Declared Income

      • Section 158BB(1A): Explicitly excludes income already assessed or declared in returns prior to the search from the block assessment.
      • Clause 293(1)(b)-(d): Incorporates a similar principle but does so by including such income in the aggregation and then providing for reduction while charging tax (sub-section (5)), thus achieving the same substantive result through a different drafting approach.
      • Analysis: Both provisions aim to prevent double taxation; Clause 293's approach may provide greater clarity in computation.

      5.3 Basis for Assessment: Evidence and Material

      • Section 158BB(2): Income is to be computed based on evidence found in the search and any other material available to the Assessing Officer.
      • Clause 293(2): Mirrors this approach, emphasizing evidence and material found or coming to notice during proceedings.
      • Analysis: The underlying principle remains unchanged, reinforcing the evidentiary basis for block assessments.

      5.4 International and Specified Domestic Transactions

      • Section 158BB(3): Excludes income relating to international transactions (section 92CA) for certain periods from block assessment.
      • Clause 293(3): Adopts a similar exclusion, now referencing section 166, and provides more detailed criteria for exclusion.
      • Analysis: The new provision reflects a more nuanced understanding of transfer pricing complexities and aligns block assessment with specialized transfer pricing procedures.

      5.5 Special Rules for Firms and Application of Other Sections

      • Section 158BB(4): Income of a firm is determined before allowing deductions to non-working partners; certain sections (68, 69, etc.) apply with necessary modifications.
      • Clause 293(4): Similar rules, but references sections 102-105 and 166 of the new Act, updating cross-references to the new legislative framework.
      • Analysis: The substance is retained, but the references are modernized to fit the new Act.

      5.6 Charging of Tax

      • Section 158BB(5): Tax is charged on the total undisclosed income determined as per sub-section (1).
      • Clause 293(5): Tax is charged on block period income as reduced by previously assessed or declared income, providing a more explicit computational formula.
      • Analysis: The new provision offers greater computational clarity.

      5.7 Treatment of Losses and Unabsorbed Depreciation

      • Section 158BB(6)/(7): Losses and unabsorbed depreciation from prior years cannot be set off in the block assessment but may be carried forward.
      • Clause 293(6)-(8): Retains this principle, with more detailed drafting and explicit reference to the relevant chapters and sections of the new Act.
      • Analysis: The continuity ensures that the deterrent effect of block assessment is preserved.

      5.8 Other Noteworthy Points

      • Drafting Style: Clause 293 is drafted in a more structured, itemized, and user-friendly manner, likely to reduce interpretational disputes.
      • Cross-References: Updated to reflect the new Act and its sections, ensuring coherence and internal consistency.

      6. Conclusion

      Clause 293 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a thoughtful evolution of the law governing block assessments in search cases. By building on the foundation laid by Section 158BB of the Income-tax Act, 1961, it seeks to provide greater clarity, transparency, and efficiency in the computation of total income of the block period. The key innovations include a more exhaustive aggregation mechanism, explicit treatment of international transactions, and a clearer framework for the treatment of losses and carry-forwards. While the substantive principles remain largely intact, the refinements in drafting and structure are likely to enhance the administration of search assessments, reduce litigation, and promote voluntary compliance.

      Future developments may focus on further aligning the block assessment procedure with advances in digital record-keeping, data analytics, and international best practices. Judicial interpretation will play a critical role in resolving any residual ambiguities and ensuring that the legislative intent-of fair and effective taxation of undisclosed income-is realized in practice.


      Full Text:

      Clause 293 Computation of total income of block period.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax