Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Clause 397 Compliance and reporting.
Clause 397(2) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 206CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 represent pivotal statutory provisions within the Indian tax framework, specifically addressing the compliance and reporting requirements concerning the Permanent Account Number (PAN) in the context of Tax Deduction at Source (TDS) and Tax Collection at Source (TCS). These provisions are designed to ensure robust tax compliance, improve traceability of transactions, and curb tax evasion by mandating the furnishing of PAN by deductees and collectees, and prescribing higher rates of TDS/TCS in the event of non-compliance.
This commentary provides a detailed and comparative analysis of Clause 397(2) and Section 206CC, examining their objectives, key provisions, practical implications, and the legal and policy rationale underlying their enactment. The analysis further explores the similarities, differences, and potential issues that may arise under the new legislative regime proposed in the Income Tax Bill, 2025.
The primary legislative intent behind both Clause 397(2) and Section 206CC is to enforce the quoting and furnishing of PAN in all transactions where tax is required to be deducted or collected at source. The rationale is twofold: first, to enhance the transparency and auditability of financial transactions, and second, to ensure that the tax authorities are able to link TDS/TCS credits with the correct taxpayer, thereby facilitating accurate tax assessments and reducing the scope for tax evasion.
Historically, the absence or incorrect quoting of PAN has led to significant challenges for the tax administration, including difficulties in tracking TDS/TCS credits, mismatches in tax returns, and the proliferation of unaccounted income. The policy response has been to introduce stringent measures, including higher rates of TDS/TCS for non-furnishing of PAN, to incentivize compliance.
Section 206CC, introduced by the Finance Act, 2017, was a direct response to these challenges, focusing specifically on TCS transactions. Clause 397(2) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 builds upon and seeks to consolidate these compliance requirements, extending them to both TDS and TCS, with certain modifications and clarifications.
Clause 397(2) is broadly applicable to all persons entitled to receive any amount on which tax is deductible (deductees) or paying any amount on which tax is collectible (collectees). It imposes a mandatory obligation on such persons to furnish their valid PAN to the person responsible for deducting or collecting tax. The provision is overriding in nature, operating "irrespective of anything contained in any other provision of this Act."
Sub-clause (b) of Clause 397(2) prescribes stringent consequences for failure to furnish PAN:
However, the rate of TCS under this provision shall not exceed 20%.
Certain exemptions are carved out for non-residents:
For rent payments specified in section 393(1) [Table: Sl. No. 2(i)], if tax is required to be deducted at higher rates due to non-furnishing of PAN, the deduction shall not exceed the rent payable for the last month of the tax year or the last month of tenancy, whichever is applicable. This provision prevents the tax deduction from exceeding the total liability of the deductee.
Clause 397(2)(f) provides that:
If a declaration becomes invalid, the deductor or collector must deduct or collect tax at the higher rates prescribed.
Deductees and collectees must furnish their PAN to the deductor or collector, and both parties must indicate the PAN in all bills, vouchers, correspondence, and other documents exchanged.
While Clause 397(2) consolidates and expands upon the existing requirements u/s 206CC, it also introduces certain new features:
Both provisions place a significant compliance burden on businesses and other entities responsible for deducting or collecting tax. They must ensure:
Individuals who fail to furnish PAN face the prospect of higher TDS/TCS, which can significantly impact their cash flows and result in loss of credit for taxes paid. Non-residents, in specific circumstances, are exempted, but must ensure they meet the conditions for such exemption.
These provisions enhance the ability of the tax administration to track transactions, match TDS/TCS credits, and identify cases of non-compliance. The invalidation of declarations and denial of certificates for non-furnishing of PAN strengthens the enforcement mechanism.
| Aspect | Clause 397(2) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 | Section 206CC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Applies to both TDS and TCS transactions | Applies only to TCS transactions |
| Higher Rate for Non-Furnishing PAN | For TDS: Higher of specified rates, 5% (for certain cases), or 20%; For TCS: Higher of twice the specified rate or 5%, capped at 20% | For TCS: Higher of twice the specified rate or 5%, capped at 20% |
| Exceptions | More detailed, including specific payments and non-residents without PE | Non-residents without PE in India |
| Declarations and Certificates | Invalid unless PAN is furnished; applies to both TDS and TCS | Same, but only for TCS |
| Rent Payments Cap | Yes, deduction cannot exceed last month's rent | No provision |
| PAN in Documents | Mandatory for all documents between deductee/collectee and deductor/collector | Same |
| Invalid or Incorrect PAN | Not explicit, may be prescribed | Explicitly deemed as non-furnishing |
Clause 397(2) of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 represents a significant evolution of the statutory framework governing compliance and reporting for TDS and TCS in India. By consolidating and expanding the existing requirements under section 206CC, the new provision seeks to create a more comprehensive, transparent, and enforceable regime. The imposition of higher rates for non-furnishing of PAN serves as a strong deterrent against non-compliance, while the detailed exemptions and clarifications reflect a nuanced approach to balancing compliance with practical realities, especially in the context of non-resident transactions.
While the new regime promises greater effectiveness in tax administration, it also brings with it increased compliance obligations and potential interpretational challenges for taxpayers and businesses. The success of Clause 397(2) will depend on clear administrative guidance, robust technological infrastructure, and ongoing stakeholder engagement to ensure smooth implementation and minimal disruption to legitimate business transactions.
Full Text:
PAN non compliance increases withholding and collection rates and invalidates declarations, expanding PAN obligations to both TDS and TCS. Clause 397(2) mandates furnishing and quoting of PAN by deductees and collectees, invalidates certain declarations and applications where PAN is absent, and requires deductors/collectors to apply prescribed higher rates of TDS and TCS in the absence of PAN. The clause covers both TDS and TCS, provides exemptions for specified non resident scenarios and specified payments, caps TDS on certain rent payments at the last month's rent, and emphasizes comprehensive documentation and reporting obligations to enhance traceability and enforcement.Press 'Enter' after typing page number.