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 LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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 LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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

      Reforming TDS on Interest Income : Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)] and 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. with Section 194A of the Income-tax Act,

      21 June, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 393 Tax to be deducted at source.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 393 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 proposes to consolidate and modernize the framework for tax deduction at source (TDS) on various categories of payments, including interest other than interest on securities. The provisions under Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)] specifically address TDS on "interest other than interest on securities" when paid by certain specified persons. Furthermore, Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] lists out exceptions to TDS applicability, delineating circumstances where no deduction is required on such interest payments. These provisions are to be read in the context of, and compared with, the current regime under section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which has long governed TDS on interest other than securities.

      The comparative analysis is essential because Section 194A is a critical provision affecting a wide range of taxpayers, including individuals, banks, co-operative societies, and various institutional entities. The proposed 2025 Bill seeks to streamline, clarify, and in some respects, expand or contract the TDS net, reflecting evolving policy priorities and administrative concerns. This commentary will provide a detailed examination of the new provisions, their objectives, operational mechanics, practical implications, and how they align with or diverge from the existing law.

      Objective and Purpose

      The primary objective behind Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)] is to ensure efficient collection of tax at source on interest income, thereby reducing tax evasion and improving compliance. The legislative intent is to rationalize the TDS framework, introduce higher thresholds for certain classes of payees (notably senior citizens), and clarify the scope of exemptions, in line with both technological advancements (such as core banking solutions) and the changing landscape of financial intermediation.

      Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] serves as a carve-out, exempting specific classes of payees and payments from the rigors of TDS, where policy considerations or practical difficulties make such deduction unnecessary or counterproductive. The historical evolution of Section 194A demonstrates a similar approach-balancing revenue interests with administrative convenience and taxpayer relief.

      Detailed Analysis of the Relevant Provisions

      1. Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)]- Interest Other Than Interest on Securities

      Sl. No.Nature of IncomePayerRateThreshold Limit
      5(ii)Any income by way of interest other than interest on securities(a) A banking company;
      (b) A co-operative society carrying on the business of banking;
      (c) A post-office for a deposit made under a scheme notified by the Central Government
      Rates in force(a) Rs. 1,00,000 (senior citizen);
      (b) Rs. 50,000 (others)
      5(iii)Any income being interest other than interest on securitiesSpecified person [other than person in 5(ii).C]Rates in forceRs. 10,000

      Key Features:

      • The TDS obligation arises when the interest income is credited or paid, whichever is earlier.
      • For banks, co-operative banks, and post offices, higher threshold limits are set, especially for senior citizens.
      • For other specified persons, a lower threshold of Rs. 10,000 applies.
      • "Specified person" is not defined in the extracted text but typically refers to persons notified or as defined elsewhere in the Act or accompanying rules.
      • There is a branch-based computation of the threshold where core banking solutions are not adopted.
      • There is a mechanism for adjustment of excess or deficient deduction within the tax year.

      2. Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] - Exemptions from TDS on Interest Other Than Securities

      Sl. No.Provision for TDSCondition for No Deduction
      7Interest other than Interest on securities referred to in section 393(1)[Table: Sl. No. 5(ii) and 5(iii)].(a) Interest income credited or paid to:
      • (i) Any banking company;
      • (ii) Any financial corporation established by or under a Central/State/Provincial Act;
      • (iii) Life Insurance Corporation of India;
      • (iv) Unit Trust of India;
      • (v) Any company or co-operative society carrying on the business of insurance;
      • (vi) Such other institution, association or body as notified by the Central Government before 1st April 2020.
      (b) Interest income credited or paid:
      • (i) By a co-operative society (other than a co-operative bank) to a member thereof;
      • (ii) By a co-operative society to another co-operative society;
      • (iii) In respect of deposits with a primary agricultural credit society/primary credit society/co-operative land mortgage or development bank;
      • (iv) In respect of deposits (other than time deposits made on or after 1st July 1995) with a co-operative society (other than a co-operative bank) engaged in banking, where turnover does not exceed Rs. 50 crore in the preceding year.
      (c) Interest income credited or paid:
      • (i) By the Central Government under any tax-related Act;
      • (ii) In respect of deposits under any scheme notified by the Central Government;
      • (iii) In respect of deposits (other than time deposits made on or after 1st July 1995) with a banking company;
      • (iv) By way of interest on compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal where the amount does not exceed Rs. 50,000 in the year;
      • (v) Or payable by infrastructure capital company/fund, infrastructure debt fund, public sector company, scheduled bank in relation to zero coupon bond issued on or after 1st June 2005;
      • (vi) As referred to in Schedule V (Table: Sl. No. 3);
      • (vii) By a firm to a partner of the firm.

      Key Features:

      • Broadly mirrors the exemption list section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
      • Includes both institutional and certain individual arrangements (e.g., co-operative society to member).
      • Thresholds and conditions are specified, especially for co-operative societies and interest on compensation.
      • Notifications by Government for further exemptions are limited to those issued before 1 April 2020, thereby freezing the scope for future ad-hoc notifications.

      Practical Implications

      1. For Payers (Deductors)

      • Threshold Management: The increased threshold for senior citizens (Rs. 1,00,000 under the Bill vs. Rs. 50,000 under the 1961 Act; noting the recent amendment) reduces the compliance burden for banks, co-operative societies, and post offices, and provides relief to elderly depositors.
      • Identification of Specified Persons: The Bill distinguishes between payers, requiring careful scrutiny of whether the payer falls under the higher threshold (bank, co-operative bank, post office) or the lower threshold (other specified person).
      • Branch-wise vs. Entity-wise Computation: The provision for branch-level computation unless core banking is adopted remains, ensuring that the benefit of threshold is not unduly multiplied.
      • Adjustment Provisions: The ability to adjust excess or deficient deductions within the year is retained, providing administrative flexibility.
      • Exemption Management: The list of exemptions is detailed and largely mirrors the existing regime, but deductors must remain vigilant about turnover criteria (e.g., co-operative societies with turnover not exceeding Rs. 50 crore).

      2. For Payees (Recipients of Interest)

      • Senior Citizens: The increased threshold for TDS on interest income is a significant relief, reducing the incidence of refunds and the need for filing declarations u/s 197A.
      • Co-operative Society Members: Members of co-operative societies (other than co-operative banks) continue to enjoy exemption for interest income, subject to turnover limits.
      • Institutional Recipients: Banks, insurance companies, LIC, UTI, and notified entities remain outside the TDS net for interest income, preserving the status quo.
      • Motor Accident Compensation: The exemption for interest on compensation up to Rs. 50,000 per year reduces hardship for accident victims.

      3. For Tax Administration

      • Clarity and Streamlining: The Bill consolidates TDS provisions in a single clause, with clear tables and cross-references, aiding easier administration.
      • Reduced Scope for Ad Hoc Exemptions: By freezing the power to notify new exempted entities after 1 April 2020, the Bill aims to bring stability and predictability to the exemption regime.

      Comparative Analysis with section 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      1. Structure and Approach

      • The 2025 Bill adopts a tabular, itemized approach, making the provisions more accessible and less ambiguous compared to the narrative style of Section 194A.
      • The Bill brings all TDS provisions under a single umbrella, as opposed to the scattered approach in the 1961 Act.

      2. Thresholds

      • Senior Citizens: The Bill increases the threshold for senior citizens to Rs. 1,00,000 (from Rs. 50,000 in the existing law, though the 2025 Finance Act has amended this to Rs. 1,00,000 as well), reflecting inflation and the need for taxpayer relief.
      • Others: The threshold for non-senior citizens is Rs. 50,000 (banks/co-operative banks/post office) and Rs. 10,000 (others), which aligns with the recently amended Section 194A.

      3. Scope of Payers

      • Both the Bill and Section 194A extend TDS obligations to individuals and HUFs whose turnover exceeds specified limits, reducing the risk of evasion through business structuring.
      • The Bill's use of "specified person" and "any person" is broadly consistent with the "any person, not being an individual or HUF" language of Section 194A, with the added clarity of tabular presentation.

      4. Exemptions

      • The list of exemptions under Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] closely mirrors Section 194A(3), with minor clarifications and a freeze on new notifications post-1 April 2020.
      • The turnover-based exemption for co-operative societies is retained, and the conditions for exemption are more precisely articulated in the Bill.

      5. Procedural Aspects

      • The Bill introduces or retains mechanisms for branch-wise threshold computation, adjustment of TDS within the year, and delivery of declarations for non-deduction, mirroring best practices from the existing regime.
      • The Bill's clarity on time of deduction (credit or payment, whichever is earlier) and inclusion of suspense account credits aligns with Section 194A(1) and its Explanation.

      6. Policy and Administrative Rationale

      • The Bill's approach reflects a desire to modernize and rationalize the TDS framework, reduce administrative friction, and provide greater relief to senior citizens and small depositors.
      • The freezing of new notifications for exemptions is a notable policy shift, aiming for stability and avoidance of ad hoc or politically motivated carve-outs.

      7. Comparative Table: Key Features

      Featuresection 194A of the Income-tax Act, 1961Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)] and Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
      ScopeInterest (other than securities) to residentsInterest (other than securities) to residents
      PayersAll except individuals/HUFs (with turnover exception)Banking companies, co-op societies, post office, specified persons
      Threshold - Bank/Co-op/Post OfficeRs. 50,000 (Rs. 1,00,000 for senior citizens)Rs. 50,000 (Rs. 1,00,000 for senior citizens)
      Threshold - OthersRs. 10,000Rs. 10,000
      Time of DeductionCredit or payment, whichever earlierCredit or payment, whichever earlier
      Branch Aggregation RuleYes (if no core banking solution)Yes (if no core banking solution)
      ExemptionsBanks, LIC, UTI, insurance cos., notified institutions, co-ops (turnover-based), partners, government, etc.Banks, LIC, UTI, insurance cos., notified institutions, co-ops (turnover-based), partners, government, etc.
      Declaration for Nil TDSYes (Form 15G/15H)Yes (prescribed form and timelines)
      Adjustment of TDSYesYes
      Suspense AccountDeemed as payee's accountDeemed as payee's account
      Central Govt. Notification PowersYesYes

      Ambiguities and Potential Issues in Interpretation

      • Definition of "Specified Person": The Bill refers to "specified person" without providing a definition in the extracted text, which could lead to interpretive disputes unless clarified in the Act or rules.
      • Overlap with Other Provisions: Careful cross-referencing is required to ensure that the correct TDS provision is applied, especially where payments may fall under multiple categories (e.g., interest cum compensation).
      • Turnover Certification: The requirement for co-operative societies to determine turnover for exemption eligibility may impose an additional compliance burden.
      • Technological Implementation: The branch-wise vs. entity-wise computation of thresholds may pose practical challenges for entities with legacy IT systems.

       Conclusion

      Clause 393(1)[Table: S.No. 5(ii) & 5(iii)] and Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 7] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represent a thoughtful evolution of the TDS regime for interest other than securities. By adopting a tabular, comprehensive, and threshold-based approach, the Bill seeks to balance revenue protection with taxpayer convenience, particularly for senior citizens and small depositors. The exemptions are carefully delineated, with a clear policy to avoid future ad hoc carve-outs. The provisions largely align with the existing Section 194A, with some enhancements in clarity, threshold levels, and administrative mechanics. Going forward, it would be beneficial for the legislature or the tax administration to issue detailed clarifications on ambiguous terms (such as "specified person") and provide robust guidance on compliance procedures, especially for co-operative societies and financial institutions.


      Full Text:

      Clause 393 Tax to be deducted at source.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax