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
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
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
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    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

      Modernizing Withholding Tax on Non-Resident Unit Income : Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 10] and Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 15] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 196A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      25 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

      The deductibility of tax at source (TDS) on income in respect of units paid to non-residents has long been an integral part of India's withholding tax regime. Section 196A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, governs TDS on income in respect of units (primarily mutual fund units) paid to non-residents. The Income Tax Bill, 2025, proposes a comprehensive overhaul of the TDS framework, as encapsulated in Clause 393, which consolidates and rationalizes the provisions relating to deduction and collection at source. Two key sub-clauses are particularly relevant to the treatment of income in respect of units paid to non-residents:

      • Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 10]: Governs TDS on income in respect of units of a Mutual Fund or specified company paid to non-residents (not being a company) or foreign companies.
      • Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 15]: Provides for exemption from TDS in respect of income payable in respect of units of the Unit Trust of India (UTI) to specified non-residents, subject to prescribed conditions.

      This commentary undertakes a detailed, item-wise analysis of these provisions, situates them in the broader context of the new TDS regime, and compares them with the existing Section 196A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, highlighting substantive changes, continuities, and potential implications.

      Objective and Purpose

      The legislative intent behind TDS provisions on income from units paid to non-residents is twofold:

      • To ensure tax compliance and collection at the earliest point of time, given the challenges in enforcing tax recovery from non-residents, and
      • To provide for a mechanism that accommodates specific policy objectives, such as incentivizing foreign investment, preventing double taxation, and ensuring administrative convenience.

      Section 196A was originally introduced to address the unique features of mutual fund income, especially in the context of growing foreign portfolio investment. The Income Tax Bill, 2025, through Clause 393 and its tables, aims to consolidate, clarify, and modernize the TDS regime, while retaining certain established carve-outs and exemptions.

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 10] and Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 15] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 10]: TDS on Income in Respect of Units Paid to Non-Residents

      Text of the Provision:

      Any income- (a) in respect of units of a Mutual Fund specified under Schedule VII (Table: Sl. No. 20) or (Table: Sl. No. 21); or (b) from the specified company. Payee: Any non-resident (not being a company) or a foreign company. Payer: Any person. Rate: As per Note 2.

      Key Features:

      • Scope: Applies to income in respect of units of specified mutual funds and specified companies, paid to non-residents (not being a company) or foreign companies.
      • Payer: Any person responsible for paying such income.
      • Payee: Non-resident individuals, foreign companies.
      • Rate: The applicable rate is to be determined as per Note 2 (which, though not reproduced in full, typically refers to the rate prescribed under the Act or as per Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs), whichever is beneficial to the assessee).
      • Timing: Deduction is to be made at the time of credit or payment, whichever is earlier.

      Interpretation and Issues:

      • Wider Applicability: The provision covers both mutual funds and specified companies, aligning with the expanded scope under the amended Section 196A.
      • Reference to Note 2: The reference to Note 2 is crucial, as it likely incorporates the DTAA override and provides for deduction at the beneficial rate, subject to the payee furnishing a tax residency certificate and other prescribed documents.
      • Non-Resident Categories: The inclusion of both non-resident individuals and foreign companies ensures comprehensive coverage of foreign investors.
      • Synchrony with Global Best Practices: The provision reflects India's commitment to international standards, particularly in recognizing the primacy of treaty provisions over domestic law in the matter of TDS rates.

      2. Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 15]: Exemption from TDS on Income in Respect of Units of UTI Paid to Certain Non-Residents

      Text of the Provision:

      Income in respect of units of non-residents referred to in section 393(2)(Table: Sl. No. 10). Income payable in respect of units of the Unit Trust of India to a non-resident Indian or a non-resident Hindu undivided family, subject to prescribed conditions.

      Key Features:

      • Exemption Scope: Provides that no TDS shall be made on income payable in respect of units of the Unit Trust of India (UTI) to a non-resident Indian (NRI) or a non-resident Hindu undivided family (HUF), subject to prescribed conditions.
      • Prescribed Conditions: While the Bill does not detail these conditions, they are expected to mirror those u/s 196A(2), i.e., that the units must have been acquired from UTI out of funds in a Non-resident (External) Account (NRE) maintained with a bank in India or by remittance in foreign currency, in accordance with FEMA and its rules.
      • Legislative Continuity: This provision ensures continuity of the long-standing policy of exempting certain NRI investments in UTI units from TDS, in order to promote foreign investment and simplify compliance for genuine investments made through prescribed channels.

      Practical Implications

      1. For Non-Resident Investors

      • Withholding Obligations: Non-resident investors in mutual funds or specified companies will continue to be subject to TDS on income from units, ensuring upfront tax collection and reducing the risk of tax leakage.
      • DTAA Benefits: The ability to avail of beneficial DTAA rates remains, provided the investor submits the TRC and other prescribed documents. This is especially relevant for investors from countries with which India has entered into favorable tax treaties.
      • UTI Units Exemption: NRIs and non-resident HUFs investing in UTI units through NRE accounts or foreign currency remittance enjoy a continued exemption from TDS, subject to compliance with prescribed conditions. This facilitates ease of investment and repatriation.

      2. For Payers (Mutual Funds/Trusts/Companies)

      • Compliance Burden: Payers must ensure correct identification of the payee's residential status, obtain necessary declarations and documentation (including TRCs for DTAA benefits), and apply the correct TDS rate.
      • Exemption Administration: For UTI units, payers must verify that the conditions for exemption are satisfied, including the source of funds and compliance with FEMA.
      • Documentation: Maintenance of records, including evidence of NRE account funding or foreign currency remittance, is essential to defend the non-deduction of TDS in case of scrutiny.

      3 For the Tax Administration

      • Enforcement and Monitoring: The consolidated TDS regime under Clause 393 enables streamlined enforcement and easier monitoring of compliance, reducing interpretational disputes and administrative complexity.
      • Policy Objectives: The retention of the UTI exemption for NRIs serves the policy objective of attracting stable foreign investment, while the general TDS requirement ensures the integrity of the tax base.

      Comparative Analysis with Section 196A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      1. Substantive Parity

      Both the new Bill and the existing Section 196A are fundamentally aligned in their approach:

      • Both require TDS on income in respect of units paid to non-residents (individuals and foreign companies).
      • Both provide for DTAA override, subject to documentation.
      • Both contain an exemption for UTI units held by NRIs/non-resident HUFs, subject to funding and FEMA compliance.

      2. Differences and Rationalizations

      • Structural Changes: The Bill consolidates TDS provisions into a single, tabular format, enhancing clarity and ease of reference, as opposed to the scattered, section-wise approach of the 1961 Act.
      • Reference to "Note 2": The Bill refers to Note 2 for the applicable rate, which likely incorporates both the statutory rate and the DTAA override, whereas Section 196A specifies the 20% rate and then the DTAA override explicitly.
      • Wider Scope: The Bill's language is broader, explicitly covering both mutual funds and specified companies, and ensuring that all categories of non-resident payees are covered.
      • Exemption Conditions: While Section 196A(2) spells out the exemption conditions in detail, the Bill refers to "prescribed conditions," which are expected to be detailed in subordinate legislation or rules. This allows for greater flexibility and administrative efficiency in updating conditions as needed.
      • Integration with FEMA: Both provisions require compliance with FEMA for the exemption, but the Bill's reliance on "prescribed conditions" may allow for easier harmonization with evolving FEMA regulations.
      • Procedural Provisions: The Bill's Clause 393 includes general procedural rules for timing of deduction, treatment of credits to suspense accounts, and precedence of certain exemptions, which are consistent with the approach of Section 196A but are now part of a unified framework.

      3. Ambiguities and Potential Issues

      • Prescribed Conditions: The lack of explicit detail in the Bill regarding the exemption conditions for UTI units introduces some uncertainty, but this is likely to be addressed through rules or notifications.
      • Interpretation of "Specified Company": The Bill refers to "specified company," which must be read in conjunction with the relevant schedules and definitions. Care must be taken to ensure that this term is consistently interpreted with reference to the legacy provisions.
      • Overlap with Other Provisions: The Bill's integrated approach may raise questions regarding the interplay with other TDS provisions, but the inclusion of precedence and overriding clauses should mitigate most conflicts.

      Conclusion

      Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 10] and Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 15] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represent a modernization and rationalization of the TDS regime for income in respect of units paid to non-residents, building on the foundation laid by Section 196A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The core policy objectives-ensuring tax collection, facilitating foreign investment, and harmonizing with international standards-remain unchanged. The new Bill's tabular and consolidated structure enhances clarity, administrative efficiency, and adaptability, while retaining essential substantive features such as the DTAA override and the UTI exemption for NRIs. The shift to "prescribed conditions" for exemptions provides flexibility, though it requires vigilance to ensure that subordinate legislation preserves the intended policy outcomes. For stakeholders, the changes are largely evolutionary rather than revolutionary, and the transition to the new regime should be manageable, provided that the rules and notifications under the Bill are promptly and clearly issued. The comparative analysis reveals that the new provisions are substantively in line with the existing law, but with improved structure and potential for more responsive administration.


      Full Text:

      Clause 393 Tax to be deducted at source.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax