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
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
    Doctrine of Reasonable Cause in Tax Penalties : Clause 470 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Voluntary Disclosure and Penalty Waiver under Indian Tax Law : Clause 469 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance with TDCAN/TAN Requirements : Clause 468 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Penalty Provision for PAN/Aadhaar Non-Compliance in Indian Tax Law : Clause 467 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for deterrence against non-cooperation with tax authorities : Clause 466 of Incom...
    Procedural Defaults and Penalties in Indian Tax Law : Clause 465 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Ensuring Compliance Among Tax-Exempt Entities : Clause 464 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Professionals(i.e. Accountant, Marchant Banker, Registered Valuer) Accountability under Indian Incom...
    Enforcement of Information Disclosure in Cross-Border Transactions : Clause 462 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-Filing and Incorrect Filing of TDS/TCS Statements : Clause 461 of the Inc...
    Enforcement of Reporting Obligations by a non-resident having liaison office : Clause 460 of Income ...
    Penalties for Reporting Non-Compliance by Resident constituent entity of an international group unde...
    Legal Implications of Non-Compliance with Reporting Requirements : Clause 458 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Strengthening Transfer Pricing Enforcement : Clause 457 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 271...
    Compliance and Penalty Mechanisms for Investment Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 456 of the Inco...
    Penalties for Inaccurate Financial Reporting under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 455 of the Income ...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance in Financial Transaction Reporting : Clause 454 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-compliant Loan Repayments in India's Income Tax Law : Clause 453 of the I...
    Mandatory Electronic Payments and Penalty Regimes : Clause 452 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
    Evolving Penalty Regimes for Monetary Transaction Violations : Clause 451 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable cause defense protects taxpayers from penalties for bona fide, non culpable defaults and encourages documented compliance.
    Clause 470 creates an exception to specified penalty provisions: no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure. It functions as a non obstante provision covering enumerated sections, shifts the burden of proof to the taxpayer, and is aimed primarily at bona fide procedural or technical lapses rather than deliberate violations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Voluntary disclosure and penalty waiver enable administrative relief when pre detection disclosure, cooperation and payment conditions are met.
    Clause 469 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to reduce or waive penalties under section 439 where a taxpayer has made a full and true voluntary disclosure before detection, cooperated in assessment and paid or arranged payment of tax or interest; it includes a deeming rule for full disclosure, prior approval safeguards for high value cases, a bar on multiple reliefs, a genuine hardship route with recorded reasons, a twelve month disposal limit, opportunity to be heard, and finality of orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to quote TDCAN/TAN: discretionary fixed sanctions apply for non compliance and knowingly false quoting.
    Clause 468 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed monetary penalty for failure to comply with Section 397 and for quoting a false Tax Deduction and Collection Account Number in prescribed documents where the person knows or believes it to be false, making the penalty discretionary and imposing a mens rea requirement for false quoting while not expressly providing for a statutory opportunity of being heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    PAN/Aadhaar compliance: new per-default penalty regime distinguishes intentional false quoting from strict liability omissions and extends responsible person liability.
    Clause 467 establishes a per-default penalty regime for non-compliance with section 262, differentiating intentional false PAN/Aadhaar quoting-which requires proof of knowledge or belief-from omissions treated as strict liability, and extends liability to persons responsible for ensuring correct quoting/authentication; it emphasizes authentication and digital e KYC integration while remaining silent on express procedural safeguards such as the opportunity to be heard, creating potential due process and transitional issues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non cooperation: new provision allows senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty without explicit hearing safeguards.
    Clause 466 empowers specified senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty for failure to comply with section 254, mirroring prior penalty structure in authority and capped quantum but omitting express procedural safeguards such as an opportunity of being heard, defences like reasonable cause, and a requirement to record reasons, thereby raising concerns about procedural fairness and consistency in imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for procedural defaults: fixed and daily fines, capped to tax collectible, with delegated authority to impose them.
    Clause 465 creates a penalty regime for procedural non compliance under the Income Tax Bill, 2025: a fixed penalty for discrete defaults, a daily penalty for continuing defaults, a cap tying certain penalties to the amount of tax deductible or collectible, and specified authorities empowered to impose penalties; it broadens the definition of income tax authority and updates cross references to the restructured Bill, while notably omitting an explicit provision requiring an opportunity to be heard before penalty imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty regime for failure to furnish prescribed statements strengthens compliance under tax exempt reporting obligations.
    A statutory penalty regime targets failure by specified research institutions and charitable funds to furnish prescribed documents, statements, or certificates within prescribed timeframes; penalties fall within a prescribed band and are imposed at the discretion of the Assessing Officer, operating as a civil compliance measure alongside general procedural safeguards and requiring stakeholders to update compliance processes to align with re referenced substantive sections.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Professional accountability: penalty for furnishing incorrect information in professional reports or certificates under the new income tax bill.
    Clause 463 imposes a strict-liability penalty regime on accountants, merchant bankers and registered valuers for furnishing incorrect information in any report or certificate under the Act or rules. It prescribes a fixed per-instance monetary penalty and empowers the Assessing Officer, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals) to impose the penalty upon satisfaction that incorrect information was furnished. The clause updates definitional references for valuers, omits an explicit definition of "accountant," and operates without prejudice to other civil or criminal consequences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish information: fixed sanction for inaccurate or missing cross-border disclosure, raising proportionality concerns.
    Clause 462 penalises any person required to furnish information under section 397(3)(d) who fails to supply such information or furnishes inaccurate information; the Assessing Officer may impose a fixed monetary penalty, the provision mirrors Section 271I in structure and intent, lacks an express reasonable-cause defence or gradation of penalty, and raises interpretative issues as to the scope of "inaccurate information," procedural safeguards, and proportionality in enforcement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: discretionary fines with short grace period where tax is paid and statement filed promptly.
    Clause 461 creates a penalty for failure to deliver statements under section 397(3)(b) or for furnishing incorrect information, authorising the Assessing Officer to impose a discretionary monetary penalty equivalent in range to the existing Section 271H. Clause 461(2) exempts penalty where tax, fee and interest are paid to the Central Government and the statement is filed within a short grace period, thereby balancing deterrence with relief for prompt substantive compliance while leaving procedural safeguards and definitions, such as "incorrect information," unclearly specified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to submit statements may be imposed by the assessing officer as a daily or capped sanction, discretion preserved.
    Clause 460 permits the Assessing Officer to impose discretionary monetary penalties on any person required to furnish a statement under section 505 for failure to file within the prescribed period, using a two-tier structure of a daily sanction for short-term delay and a capped penalty for longer default, with applicability dependent on the scope of the parent reporting obligation and subject to the general procedural and appellate framework of the tax law.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reporting penalties: new clause preserves escalating daily fines and a large fixed penalty for inaccurate international tax reports.
    Clause 459 establishes a tiered penalty regime under section 511 for reporting entities: daily penalties for failure to furnish reports, daily penalties for failure to produce information after the allowed period, an escalated daily penalty if default continues after service of a penalty order, and a substantial fixed penalty for furnishing inaccurate information or failing to correct known or discovered inaccuracies. The prescribed authority under section 511 is empowered to impose these penalties, and the clause mirrors Section 271GB in quantum and triggers while raising issues about reasonable cause relief and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to report transfers of management or control triggers significant compliance and enforcement consequences.
    Clause 458 creates a penalty for failure by an Indian concern to furnish information or documents under section 506, authorising the prescribed income-tax authority to impose either a transaction-value-based penalty where a transaction effects a direct or indirect transfer of management or control, or a fixed monetary penalty otherwise, and otherwise mirrors the substantive framework and enforcement objectives of Section 271GA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation penalty: failure to furnish documents leads to transaction value based penalties and enforcement by tax authorities.
    Failure to furnish prescribed transfer pricing information or documentation for international or specified domestic transactions triggers a transaction value based penalty under Clause 457, enforceable by the Assessing Officer, authorised Transfer Pricing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals); the clause ties this enforcement directly to the obligations in section 171(2) and raises interpretive issues concerning the meaning of failure, computation of transaction value, overlap with other penalties, and the availability of a reasonable cause defence.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: eligible investment funds face a fixed sanction under the bill; authority may impose it.
    Clause 456 imposes a fixed penalty where an eligible investment fund fails to furnish required statements or information within the prescribed time; the prescribed income-tax authority may direct payment of the fixed sanction. The reporting deadline is set by the substantive eligibility reporting provision; the penalty is discretionary rather than automatic, lacks a graded scale, and does not expressly specify procedural safeguards such as criteria for discretion or an opportunity to be heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for inaccurate financial reporting imposes institutional and account-holder liability while enabling recovery of penalties from account holders.
    Clause 455 mandates penalties for persons required to furnish statements of financial transactions or reportable accounts for providing inaccurate information or failing to meet due diligence obligations, and imposes an additional per-account penalty on reporting financial institutions where inaccuracies stem from account-holder-supplied false information; reporting institutions may recover such additional penalties from the responsible account holders by direct recovery or retention of funds, with imposition directed by the prescribed income-tax authority and substantive continuity with the former Section 271FAA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish financial transaction statements - escalating daily sanctions for continued non-compliance after notice.
    Clause 454 creates a statutory penalty regime for failure to furnish a statement of financial transaction or reportable account, prescribing a daily penalty accruing from the date the filing deadline lapses, with an escalated daily rate where default continues after a formal notice, and vesting discretionary imposition authority in the income-tax authority subject to procedural safeguards and rights to challenge.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non-compliant loan repayments: Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to the amount repaid for procedural breaches.
    Clause 453 permits the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to any loan, deposit or specified advance repaid in contravention of section 188, applying to all persons and covering repayments made by non-transparent modes. The provision creates strict liability based on procedural breach rather than mens rea, centralizes enforcement with the Assessing Officer, and omits an explicit reasonable-cause defence, raising potential interpretative and transitional issues regarding the scope of specified advances and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic payment mandate triggers daily penalties for non compliance unless a taxpayer proves good and sufficient reason.
    Clause 452 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed per day monetary penalty for failure to provide prescribed electronic modes of payment under section 187, subject to a saving where the person proves good and sufficient reason for the failure; the provision mirrors the former section 271DB framework but streamlines authority and lacks detailed procedural guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary transaction penalty: discretion to impose a penalty equal to prohibited receipt unless good and sufficient reasons are proved.
    Clause 451 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received in contravention of section 186 unless the recipient proves good and sufficient reasons; the provision emphasises proportionality, vests discretion in enforcement, omits explicit procedural safeguards and mens rea, and mirrors the substantive penalty quantum and defence in the earlier statutory regime while differing in statutory tone and procedural concision.

    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

      Analysis of Tax Deduction at Source on Securities Income of FIIs and Specified Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 393(2)[Table: S.No. 15 & 16], Clause 393(4)[Table: S.No. 16 & 17] of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 196D of Income Tax Act, 1961

      27 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 taxation of income earned by Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) and specified funds from securities has long been a significant aspect of Indian tax policy, balancing the twin objectives of attracting foreign capital and ensuring tax compliance. Section 196D of the Income Tax Act, 1961, provided a dedicated withholding tax regime for FIIs, and, following the emergence of new fund structures and investment vehicles, the law has evolved to address specified funds and related entities.

      With the introduction of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, Clause 393 proposes a comprehensive overhaul of the tax deduction at source (TDS) regime, including detailed tables for payments to both residents and non-residents. Of particular relevance are Clause 393(2) [Table: S.No. 15 & 16] and Clause 393(4) [Table: S.No. 16 & 17], which directly address TDS on income from securities payable to FIIs and specified funds, and the circumstances where such deduction is not required.

      This commentary undertakes a detailed analysis of these provisions, their legislative intent, operational mechanics, interpretative issues, and their comparative positioning vis-`a-vis the existing Section 196D of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The discussion is structured to provide clarity on each relevant aspect, highlight practical implications, and identify areas for potential reform or judicial scrutiny.

      Objective and Purpose 

      The legislative intent behind the TDS regime for FIIs and specified funds is twofold: to ensure the collection of tax at the earliest possible point and to provide clarity and certainty to foreign investors regarding their tax obligations in India. Historically, ambiguities in the characterization of income, the applicable rates, and the interaction with double taxation avoidance agreements (DTAAs) have led to litigation and compliance challenges.

      The Income Tax Bill, 2025, through Clause 393 and its detailed tables, seeks to codify and streamline TDS provisions, making them more accessible and operationally efficient. The specific focus on FIIs and specified funds reflects the increasing complexity of cross-border investments and the need to align domestic law with international best practices, while safeguarding the revenue interests of the exchequer.

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 393(2) [Table: S.No. 15 & 16] and Clause 393(4) [Table: S.No. 16 & 17] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      I. Clause 393(2) [Table: S.No. 15 & 16] - TDS on Income from Securities Payable to FIIs and Specified Funds

      A. Clause 393(2) Table: S.No. 15

      • Nature of Income: Any income in respect of securities referred to in section 210(1) (Table: Sl. No. 1).
      • Payee: Any Foreign Institutional Investor.
      • Payer: Any person.
      • Rate: As per Note 2.

      This provision mandates that any person responsible for making payment of income in respect of specified securities to a Foreign Institutional Investor must deduct tax at source at the rate specified in Note 2. The reference to section 210(1) and Table: Sl. No. 1 is critical, as it defines the universe of "securities" for this purpose.

      Note 2 (not fully reproduced in the excerpt) typically clarifies the applicable rate, which may be the rate prescribed under the Act or the rate as per the relevant DTAA, whichever is lower, subject to the fulfillment of prescribed conditions (such as submission of a tax residency certificate, etc.).

      B. Clause 393(2) Table: S.No. 16

      • Nature of Income: Any income in respect of securities referred to in section 210(1) (Table: Sl. No. 1).
      • Payee: A specified fund, referred to in Schedule VI [Note 1(g)].
      • Payer: Any person.
      • Rate: 10%.

      This item extends the TDS regime to "specified funds," a term that generally refers to Category III Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) set up in International Financial Services Centres (IFSCs), as defined in the relevant Schedules and Notes. The prescribed TDS rate is 10%, aligning with the concessional regime introduced in recent years for such funds to promote the IFSC framework.

      II. Clause 393(4) [Table: S.No. 16 & 17] - Exemptions from TDS for FIIs and Specified Funds

      A. Clause 393(4) Table: S.No. 16

      • Provision for TDS: Income of Foreign Institutional Investors from securities referred to in section 393(2)(Table: Sl. No. 15).
      • Condition for No Deduction: Income, by way of capital gains arising from the transfer of securities referred to in section 210, if payable to a Foreign Institutional Investor.

      This clause provides that no TDS is required on capital gains arising to FIIs from the transfer of securities, reflecting the policy that while such capital gains are taxable in the hands of FIIs, the mechanism of TDS is not triggered. This is in line with the existing regime u/s 196D(2) of the 1961 Act.

      B. Clause 393(4) Table: S.No. 17

      • Provision for TDS: Income of Specified Fund from securities referred to in section 393(2)(Table: Sl. No. 16).
      • Condition for No Deduction: Income exempt at Schedule VI (Table: Sl. No. 1) to (Table: Sl. No. 4).

      This provision ensures that where the income of a specified fund is exempt under the relevant Schedules (typically corresponding to the exempt income u/s 10(4D) of the 1961 Act), no TDS is to be effected. This prevents unnecessary withholding and subsequent refund procedures where the underlying income is statutorily exempt.

      Practical Implications

      A. For Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs)

      The provisions ensure that FIIs are subject to TDS only on income from securities (such as dividends, interest, etc.), and not on capital gains. This distinction is crucial, as FIIs are often subject to different tax rates on capital gains (short-term and long-term) and other income under the Act and relevant DTAAs. The non-applicability of TDS on capital gains facilitates smoother repatriation of sale proceeds and reduces administrative burdens.

      The provision for applying the lower of the domestic rate or DTAA rate (subject to documentation) provides FIIs with the benefit of treaty protection, enhancing India's attractiveness as an investment destination.

      B. For Specified Funds

      Specified funds (typically Category III AIFs in IFSCs) are subject to a 10% TDS rate on income from securities, with an explicit carve-out for exempt income. This supports the policy objective of promoting IFSCs as competitive investment destinations and aligns with the concessional tax regime introduced in recent years.

      The exemption from TDS on exempt income prevents the cash flow and compliance issues that would arise if tax were withheld on income not subject to tax in the first place.

      C. For Payers and Intermediaries

      The clear tabulation of TDS rates and exemptions in the Bill aids compliance for Indian custodians, brokers, and other intermediaries responsible for making payments to FIIs and specified funds. The alignment with treaty provisions and explicit reference to documentation requirements reduces the risk of disputes and penal consequences.

      D. For the Revenue

      The provisions strike a balance between revenue protection (by ensuring TDS on taxable income) and administrative efficiency (by exempting TDS on capital gains and exempt income). The requirement for documentation to avail treaty rates helps prevent abuse and ensures that only eligible entities benefit from concessional rates.

      Comparative Analysis with Section 196D of the Income Tax Act, 1961

      A. Scope and Structure

      Both Section 196D and Clause 393(2) of the new Bill address TDS on income from securities payable to FIIs and specified funds. However, the Bill adopts a tabular format, making the provisions more accessible and operationally clear. The structure allows for easy identification of the applicable rate, payee, payer, and nature of income.

      B. TDS Rates

      • FIIs: Section 196D(1) prescribes a 20% TDS rate (or DTAA rate, if lower). Clause 393(2) Table: S.No. 15 refers to the rate as per Note 2, which is expected to mirror this approach.
      • Specified Funds: Section 196D(1A) prescribes a 10% TDS rate, and Clause 393(2) Table: S.No. 16 does the same.

      C. Exemption for Capital Gains

      Section 196D(2) explicitly provides that no TDS is to be made on capital gains payable to FIIs. Clause 393(4) Table: S.No. 16 replicates this, ensuring continuity and clarity.

      D. Exemption for Exempt Income of Specified Funds

      Section 196D(1A) (proviso) and Clause 393(4) Table: S.No. 17 both provide that no TDS is required on income of specified funds that is exempt under the relevant provisions (Section 10(4D) in the 1961 Act; corresponding Schedule VI in the Bill). This harmonization prevents unnecessary withholding and aligns with the policy of promoting IFSCs.

      E. Operational Aspects

      Both regimes require TDS to be effected at the earlier of credit or payment, and both allow for the application of DTAA rates subject to prescribed documentation (tax residency certificate, etc.). The Bill's tabular format, however, may facilitate better compliance and reduce interpretational disputes.

      F. Ambiguities and Potential Issues

      • Definition of "Securities": Both provisions refer to securities as defined in the respective sections. Any ambiguity in the definition of securities (especially with the proliferation of new financial instruments) could lead to disputes.
      • Interaction with DTAAs: While both regimes provide for the application of lower treaty rates, practical issues may arise regarding documentation, timing, and the scope of "beneficial ownership."
      • Specified Funds: The definition and eligibility criteria for "specified funds" must be clear to prevent misuse or unintended exclusion.

      G. Unique Features of the Bill

      • The Bill's Clause 393(4) provides a consolidated table of exemptions from TDS, which is more user-friendly than the scattered provisos and explanations in the 1961 Act.
      • The Bill's approach allows for easier updates and amendments, as new categories of payees or types of income can be added to the tables without redrafting the entire section.

      H. International Comparison

      Many jurisdictions provide for a reduced or zero withholding tax rate for foreign portfolio investors on capital gains, in line with India's approach. The clarity regarding TDS on exempt income and capital gains in the Bill

      Practical Implications

      For Foreign Institutional Investors

      The continuation of the exemption from TDS on capital gains and the recognition of treaty rates for other income streams is a welcome development, as it reduces the risk of over-withholding and the need for refund claims. The tabular presentation in the Bill may facilitate easier compliance and reduce the risk of inadvertent non-compliance.

      For Specified Funds

      The explicit 10% TDS rate (subject to exemption for non-taxable income) provides certainty for specified funds, particularly those located in IFSCs. The exemption from TDS on exempt income aligns with the policy objective of promoting India as a global asset management hub.

      For Payers (Indian Companies, Asset Managers, Custodians)

      The clarity on timing, rate, and scope of TDS reduces the compliance burden and the risk of penal consequences for under- or over-withholding. The Bill's structure may also facilitate automation and system-based TDS compliance for large custodians and asset managers.

      For Tax Administration

      A streamlined and unambiguous TDS regime reduces administrative workload, minimizes disputes, and enhances the efficiency of tax collection. The new Bill's format may also improve data analytics and risk assessment by the tax authorities.

      Potential Issues and Areas for Clarification

      • Definition Alignment: The definitions of "securities", "specified fund", and "income" should be harmonized across the substantive and procedural provisions to avoid confusion or litigation.
      • Applicability of DTAA: While the general law provides for DTAA override, explicit mention in the TDS provisions (as in the 1961 Act) would enhance clarity for payers and recipients.
      • Procedural Compliance: The onus on payers to identify exempt income (especially for specified funds with mixed portfolios) may require robust documentation and, potentially, certification from the recipient fund.
      • Transition Issues: Implementation of the new Bill may require updated systems and processes for payers, especially for cross-referencing the correct tables and schedules.

      Conclusion

      Clause 393(2) [Table: S.No. 15 & 16] and Clause 393(4) [Table: S.No. 16 & 17] of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represent a logical evolution of the existing Section 196D regime, retaining its core principles while enhancing clarity, operational efficiency, and alignment with policy objectives. The provisions ensure that FIIs and specified funds are subject to TDS only on income that is taxable, at rates that reflect both domestic law and treaty obligations, and that capital gains and exempt income are not subject to unnecessary withholding.

      The tabular format and consolidated exemption provisions in the Bill are significant improvements, likely to aid compliance and reduce litigation. However, careful attention must be paid to the definitions of securities and specified funds, the operationalization of DTAA benefits, and the prevention of abuse. As India's capital markets continue to evolve, ongoing legislative and judicial scrutiny will be essential to ensure that the TDS regime remains robust, fair, and conducive to investment.


      Full Text:

      Clause 393 Tax to be deducted at source.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax