Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
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 432 Person entitled to claim refund in certain special cases.
Clause 432 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 238 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both address the entitlement to claim income tax refunds in special circumstances, particularly where the income of one person is included in another's total income, and in cases where the original recipient is incapacitated from claiming a refund. These provisions are critical in ensuring that the right to tax refunds is not lost due to technicalities or extraordinary situations such as death, incapacity, or insolvency. This commentary provides an in-depth analysis of Clause 432, its objectives, detailed provisions, practical implications, and a comparative assessment with the existing Section 238, highlighting similarities, differences, and the legislative intent behind any changes.
The primary objective of both Clause 432 and Section 238 is to ensure that the mechanism for claiming tax refunds remains robust, equitable, and accessible, even in exceptional circumstances. These provisions aim to:
The legislative history indicates a consistent policy approach: to avoid situations where legitimate refund claims are denied due to procedural or legal incapacity of the original taxpayer, thereby upholding the principles of fairness and justice in tax administration.
Clause 432(1) provides:
"Where the income of one person is included in total income of any another person under any provision of this Act, the latter shall be eligible for a refund under this Part in respect of such income."
This provision addresses situations where, under the clubbing provisions of the Act, income legally belonging to one person is, by operation of law, included in the total income of another person. This may occur, for example, in cases involving minor children, spouses, or other specified relationships where anti-avoidance provisions apply. The clause clarifies that the person in whose total income the income is included (the "latter") is entitled to any refund arising from excess tax paid or deducted in respect of such income.
The rationale is to ensure that the person who bears the tax liability on the clubbed income is also the beneficiary of any refund, thereby maintaining consistency and preventing double recovery or denial of refund.
Clause 432(2) states:
"Where a person is unable to claim or receive a refund due to him on account of death, incapacity, insolvency, liquidation or other cause, his legal representative or the trustee or guardian or receiver, shall be entitled to claim or receive such refund for the benefit of such person or his estate."
This provision is designed to address situations where the taxpayer is unable to act due to death or legal incapacity, or where the taxpayer's assets are under the control of a receiver or liquidator. The clause authorizes specified persons-legal representatives, trustees, guardians, or receivers-to claim or receive the refund on behalf of the taxpayer or the taxpayer's estate. The refund is to be applied for the benefit of the person entitled or his estate, ensuring that the right to a refund is not extinguished by the taxpayer's inability to claim it personally.
The use of the phrase "or other cause" is broad, allowing for flexibility and covering any circumstances not specifically enumerated but which result in the taxpayer's inability to claim the refund.
Clause 432 is drafted in clear terms, but certain interpretative issues may arise:
Both provisions are similarly structured, with two main sub-clauses addressing:
The language of Clause 432 is more streamlined and modernized, reflecting contemporary legislative drafting standards.
A significant difference is the presence of Section 238(1A) in the 1961 Act:
"Where the value of fringe benefits provided or deemed to have been provided by one employer is included under any provisions of Chapter XII-H in the value of fringe benefits provided or deemed to have been provided by any other employer, the latter alone shall be entitled to a refund under this Chapter in respect of such fringe benefits."
This sub-section was introduced in 2005 to deal with the then-prevailing Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) regime, clarifying refund entitlement where fringe benefits were attributed to another employer. Clause 432 of the 2025 Bill omits any reference to fringe benefits or FBT, likely because the FBT regime has since been abolished (with effect from AY 2010-11).
This omission reflects legislative updating and streamlining, removing obsolete references and focusing on the core principles of refund entitlement.
Clause 432 refers to refunds "under this Part," while Section 238 refers to refunds "under this Chapter." The difference may be technical, depending on the structure of the new Bill, but the substantive effect remains the same-entitlement is limited to refunds governed by the relevant statutory provisions.
Both provisions use the phrase "other cause" in sub-section (2), providing flexibility to accommodate a wide range of circumstances. Judicial interpretation under the 1961 Act has generally construed this phrase liberally, covering any situation where the taxpayer is unable to claim the refund.
Neither provision prescribes detailed procedures for claims by legal representatives or others. However, established practice under the 1961 Act requires submission of proof of authority (such as succession certificates, court orders, or powers of attorney) to the tax authorities. It is expected that similar procedures will be prescribed by rules under the 2025 Bill.
The core legislative intent remains unchanged: to ensure that the right to a refund is preserved and can be exercised by the appropriate person, even in special or exceptional circumstances. The updating of the provision in the 2025 Bill reflects a policy of legislative clarity and removal of obsolete references (such as FBT), without altering the substantive rights of taxpayers or their representatives.
| Aspect | Clause 432 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 | Section 238 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 |
|---|---|---|
| Clubbing of Income | Refund to person in whose income included | Same provision |
| Fringe Benefit Tax | No reference (FBT regime abolished) | Specific sub-section (1A) for FBT |
| Death/Incapacity/Insolvency/Liquidation | Legal representative, trustee, guardian, or receiver entitled to claim | Same provision |
| Other Cause | Included for flexibility | Included for flexibility |
| Procedural Requirements | Not specified; to be prescribed by rules | Not specified; governed by practice and rules |
The removal of the FBT-specific provision reflects the obsolescence of the FBT regime and modernizes the statute. This avoids confusion and ensures the law is relevant to the current tax framework.
Taxpayers and their representatives can be assured that their substantive rights are preserved, and the processes for claiming refunds in special cases remain fundamentally unchanged.
By simplifying and updating the language, the provision is easier to interpret and apply, reducing the scope for disputes and litigation.
Clause 432 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a continuation and modernization of the principles embodied in Section 238 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Its primary function is to ensure that the entitlement to tax refunds is preserved and can be exercised by the appropriate person, even in cases of clubbing of income or incapacity of the taxpayer. The omission of references to fringe benefit tax reflects the evolution of the tax regime and enhances the clarity of the law. The provision is drafted broadly to accommodate a range of circumstances, but its effectiveness will depend on clear procedural rules and judicial interpretation where ambiguities arise. Overall, Clause 432 upholds the values of fairness, flexibility, and administrative efficiency in the tax refund process.
Full Text:
Clause 432 Person entitled to claim refund in certain special cases.
Refund entitlement: clubbed-income payee and authorised representatives may claim tax refunds when taxpayer cannot act. The clause entitles the person in whose total income clubbed income is included to claim the refund attributable to that income, and authorises a legal representative, trustee, guardian or receiver to claim or receive refunds on behalf of a taxpayer who cannot do so because of death, incapacity, insolvency, liquidation or similar cause; procedural formalities and limitation issues are left to subordinate rules and practice.Press 'Enter' after typing page number.