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

      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