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
    Evolution of Executive Scheme-Making Powers in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 532 of the Income Tax ...
    Withdrawal of Statutory Approvals under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 529 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Legal Perspectives on Condonation of Delay in Income Tax Approvals : Clause 528 of Income Tax Bill, ...
    Executive Discretion and Tax Incentives in India's Mineral Oil Sector : Clause 527 of the Income Tax...
    Immunity and Jurisdictional Bar in Tax Administration : Clause 526 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Authorisation and Assessment in Multi-Person Search Cases : Clause 525 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Rebuttable Presumptions in Tax Searches : Clause 524 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292C o...
    Deeming Service of Notice in Tax Proceedings Under Income Tax Law : Clause 523 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice : Clause 522 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292B of...
    Exclusion of Probationary Relief for Tax Offenders : Clause 521 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...
    Jurisdictional Thresholds for Tax Offence Trials : Clause 520 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Secti...
    Immunity from Prosecution under Income Tax Law : Clause 519 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section...
    Practical Impact of Indemnity Provisions in Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Legal Mandate for Receipts in Indian Tax Law : Clause 517 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 2...
    Evolution of Rounding Off Provisions regarding tax payable in Indian Tax Law : Clause 516 of the Inc...
    Legal Framework of Rounding Off Total Income in India tax Law : Clause 516 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    The Right of Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 515 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Analysis of Registered Valuer Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 513 of the Income Ta...
    Public Disclosure of Tax Offenders : Clause 512 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 287 of the ...
    Legal Framework for International Group Reporting : Clause 511 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
❯❯
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
    Power to frame schemes expands executive authority to enable faceless, technology-driven tax administration and modify statutory application.
    Clause 532 grants the Central Government authority to make schemes for any purpose of the Act to enhance efficiency, transparency and accountability by eliminating taxpayer interface and optimising resources, and to issue notifications modifying the application of any provision of the Act to give effect to such schemes; it also permits amendment of schemes under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and requires that notifications be laid before each House of Parliament.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Withdrawal of approvals: authorities may rescind statutory tax approvals after recording reasons and giving a fair hearing.
    Clause 529 authorises the Central Government, the Board, or income-tax authorities to withdraw any approval under the Act at any time after recording reasons and giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, even if the enabling provision lacks an express withdrawal clause. The provision mandates recorded reasons and a hearing but leaves "approval" undefined, does not specify substantive grounds for withdrawal, and does not prescribe a limitation period, which may raise uncertainty and prompt judicial scrutiny of procedural adequacy.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: authority may excuse late tax approvals for sufficient cause, subject to discretionary review and safeguards.
    Clause 528 permits the Central Government or the Board to condone delays in obtaining approvals required before a specified date under the Act for "sufficient cause," vesting discretionary power in the same authority to excuse late applications across a broad range of approvals while leaving "sufficient cause," procedural steps, time limits and appeal mechanisms undefined.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Executive discretion in tax exemptions for mineral oil sector enables tailored fiscal relief to investors and service providers.
    Clause 527 vests the Central Government with discretionary power to grant exemptions, reductions or other modifications in income tax for persons engaged in prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils, including operators, service providers, suppliers and their employees; notifications must be laid before Parliament and key terms like "mineral oil" and "status" are defined or cross referenced in the Bill.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Bar on civil suits prevents civil court challenges to tax proceedings, preserving exclusive statutory remedies and good faith immunity.
    The provision bars any civil suit to set aside or modify "any proceeding taken or order made" under the Act and grants immunity to the Government and its officers for acts done or intended to be done in good faith, channeling challenges to the statutory appellate and revisionary framework while preserving writ review for ultra vires, mala fide, or constitutional breaches.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Authorisation for multi-person searches: single authorisations allowed, but assessments must be made separately for each person.
    Clause 525 permits a single search or requisition authorisation to name multiple persons without requiring separate instruments, and provides that such joint naming does not, by itself, constitute authorisation against an AOP or BOI. Notwithstanding a consolidated authorisation, assessment or reassessment must be made separately in the name of each person mentioned, preserving individualized tax liability determinations while allowing administrative consolidation of search procedures.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rebuttable presumption in tax searches shifts evidentiary burden to taxpayers and explicitly covers virtual digital assets.
    Clause 524 establishes a rebuttable presumption that items found in search or survey-books, documents, money, bullion, jewellery, other valuables and virtual digital assets-belong to the person in whose possession they were found; that contents of books and documents are true; that signatures and handwriting are authentic; and that stamped, executed or attested documents were duly executed, with identical presumptions applying to items requisitioned to officers as if discovered in a search.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Deeming validity of notice: participation or cooperation bars later objections unless raised before assessment completion.
    Clause 523 creates a deeming fiction that an assessee's appearance in proceedings or co-operation in an inquiry shall be treated as valid and timely service of any statutory notice, and it precludes the assessee from later objecting that the notice was not served, not timely served, or served improperly; however, this preclusion does not apply where the assessee raises the objection before completion of the assessment or reassessment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Substantial compliance preserves tax proceedings despite minor procedural errors when the instrument fulfils legislative intent.
    Clause 522 preserves the validity of returns, assessments, notices, summonses and other proceedings despite clerical, typographical or similar procedural defects, provided the document or action is in substance and effect in conformity with the intent and purposes of the Act; it does not cure defects that go to jurisdiction, authority, limitation, or breaches of natural justice, and mirrors Section 292B to maintain continuity of judicial interpretation and application.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of probationary relief bars adult tax offenders from probationary provisions, preserving minors' exception and updating criminal code reference.
    The clause mandates that the Probation of Offenders Act and the analogous provision in the new criminal procedure code shall not apply to persons convicted under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, except for those under eighteen, thereby removing judicial discretion for adult tax offenders, updating statutory references, and preserving a minors' exception while raising procedural questions on age determination and scope.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional threshold: income tax offences must be tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class, altering forum nomenclature.
    Clause 520 mandates that no court inferior to a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, creating a uniform jurisdictional threshold for all tax offences. The provision modernizes terminology compared with Section 292 of the 1961 Act by omitting presidency magistrates, aligning with the CrPC framework and metropolitan magistrates' equivalence, while leaving potential ambiguities about special statute courts and transitional application. Its practical effect is to require complaints be filed before competent magistrates and to enable jurisdictional challenges where proceedings are instituted in inferior forums.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Immunity from prosecution: conditional grants require full and true disclosure and are revocable if falsehood or concealment is found.
    Immunity from prosecution allows the Central Government to grant discretionary, conditional immunity to persons concerned in concealment of income or tax evasion in exchange for a full and true disclosure, with written reasons required for the grant; acceptance limits prosecution and penalty to the scope specified, while failure to fully comply permits the government to record a finding and withdraw immunity, rendering the person liable to trial and penalty as if immunity had never been granted.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Indemnity for withholding agents protects deductors from civil claims when acting lawfully under the tax statute.
    Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 provides a statutory indemnity for persons who deduct, retain, or pay tax in pursuance of the tax statute in respect of income belonging to another person, serving as a defence against civil claims by the income recipient where the agent acts lawfully; the protection is conditional on actions being within the scope of the statute and leaves unresolved issues about consequential losses, claim procedures, and interaction with other legal remedies.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Receipt obligation: mandatory issuance of receipts for any tax money paid or recovered, securing payment evidence and taxpayer protection.
    The provision mandates that a receipt shall be given for any money paid or recovered under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, covering voluntary payments and enforced recoveries under the Act. The clause is mandatory but silent on form, content, timing, issuing authority, mode of delivery, and consequences for non-issuance; subordinated rules and administrative practice-including electronic acknowledgments-are expected to fill these operational gaps. The receipt serves as an acknowledgement and evidentiary record rather than an automatic discharge of liability.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding off rules: ignore paise then round to nearest ten rupees, making the rounded figure legally operative.
    The provision applies rounding to computed total income and to amounts payable or refundable by first ignoring paise and then rounding the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten rupees-rounding up where the units digit is five or more and rounding down where it is less than five-and declares the rounded amount to be the deemed operative total income or amount payable or refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding of tax amounts: unified rule mandates nearest multiple rounding for total income, payable and refundable amounts.
    Clause 516 prescribes a mandatory two-step rounding mechanism: ignore any paise, then round the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten-rounding up if the last digit is five or more and down if less than five-and deems the rounded figure to be the amount of total income, amount payable, or amount refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Right of representation: statutory authorisation and disqualification framework balancing access to representation with safeguards.
    The statute permits an assessee to appear by an authorised representative across all proceedings while preserving mandatory personal attendance for oath examination; it defines eligible representatives (including professionals, bank officers, relatives, legacy practitioners and any persons as prescribed), enumerates exhaustive exclusions and disqualifications to prevent conflicts of interest, distinguishes disciplinary regimes for professionals and nonprofessionals (with Rule 52 designating prescribed tax authorities to disqualify nonprofessionals), and mandates procedural safeguards including a hearing and appeal mechanism, while carrying forward prior disqualifications.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Registered valuer representation enables technical valuation expertise in tax proceedings, subject to personal-examination exception and updated registration framework.
    Clause 513 grants an assessee the discretionary right to attend valuation-related proceedings before income-tax authorities or the Appellate Tribunal through a "registered valuer," excludes cases where personal attendance is required for examination on oath or affirmation, and defines "registered valuer" by reference to section 514 of the Bill, thereby creating a self-contained regime that modernizes registration, oversight, and professional standards for valuers.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Public disclosure of tax offenders can deter non-compliance while imposing reputational consequences under discretionary publication powers.
    Clause 512 empowers the Central Government to publish names and particulars of assessees when it considers such publication necessary or expedient in the public interest, subject to a safeguard that penalty-related publication await exhaustion or non-pursuit of appellate remedies, and permits publication of partners, directors and other associated persons if circumstances justify it. The clause modernises language and cross-references from Section 287 of the 1961 Act while preserving substantive continuity, raising interpretive concerns about the breadth of "particulars" and the subjectivity of "public interest."
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Country-by-Country reporting requires multinational groups to submit consolidated jurisdictional tax and economic data for risk assessment.
    Clause 511 mandates Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting by parent entities or alternate reporting entities resident in India and requires Indian constituent entities to notify the tax authority of the parent or ARE. It prescribes report contents-aggregate jurisdictional financial and economic indicators, constituent identification, and business activities-provides a secondary filing route where the parent's jurisdiction lacks filing or exchange, allows designation of a single Indian filer, sets a revenue threshold for applicability, and grants verification powers to the authority, with procedural details to be prescribed.

    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

      Monetary Limits of Filing of Appeals by Income-tax Authorities : Clause 373 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      7 July, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 373 Filing of appeal or by income-tax authority.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 373 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and its predecessor, Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, address a crucial aspect of tax administration in India: the regulation of appeals and applications for reference filed by income-tax authorities. The legislative intent behind these provisions is to streamline the appellate process, prevent unnecessary litigation, and provide clarity regarding the consequences of not filing appeals in certain cases. This commentary provides a detailed analysis of Clause 373, elucidates its objectives, interprets its key provisions, and compares it meticulously with Section 268A. The discussion also explores the practical implications for stakeholders and highlights areas of continuity and change in the transition from the 1961 Act to the proposed 2025 regime.

      Objective and Purpose

      The primary objective of both Clause 373 and Section 268A is to empower the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to regulate the filing of appeals by income-tax authorities. This is achieved by allowing the Board to set monetary thresholds or other criteria, thereby preventing the filing of appeals in cases where the tax effect is below a specified limit. The rationale is twofold:

      • To reduce the burden on appellate forums by filtering out cases with low revenue impact.
      • To ensure consistent and efficient tax administration by providing clear guidelines to tax authorities regarding when to pursue appellate remedies.

      Historically, the Indian tax system has witnessed a high volume of litigation, much of which involves relatively minor tax amounts. The policy consideration underpinning these provisions is to strike a balance between the right of the revenue to challenge adverse decisions and the need to avoid clogging the judicial system with inconsequential disputes. Both provisions also address the potential misuse of the non-filing of appeals as a ground for estoppel or acquiescence by assessees.

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 373 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      1. Sub-section (1): Empowerment of the Board to Issue Orders, Instructions, or Directions
        This sub-section authorizes the Board to issue orders, instructions, or directions to other income-tax authorities, fixing such monetary limits as it may deem fit for the purpose of regulating the filing of appeals by any income-tax authority under the provisions of the relevant chapter. The language is broad, granting the Board discretion to determine the criteria for filing appeals.
        • Interpretation: The provision recognizes the hierarchy within the tax administration and places the responsibility of policy-making and standard-setting with the CBDT. The phrase "from time to time" indicates that the Board may revise these limits or criteria as circumstances change, such as inflation, changes in tax rates, or policy shifts.
        • Ambiguities: The clause does not specify the methodology for determining monetary limits, leaving it entirely to the Board's discretion. However, this flexibility is necessary, given the dynamic nature of tax administration.
      2. Sub-section (2): Non-filing of Appeal Not a Bar in Other Cases
        This sub-section provides that where an income-tax authority has not filed any appeal on any issue in the case of an assessee for any tax year, pursuant to the Board's orders, it does not preclude the authority from filing an appeal on the same issue in the case of:
        • (a) the same assessee for any other tax year; or
        • (b) any other assessee for the same or any other tax year.
        • Interpretation: The provision ensures that the decision not to appeal in one case (due to monetary limits or other instructions) does not set a binding precedent against the revenue in other cases. This is crucial to prevent assessees from arguing that the non-filing of an appeal in one instance amounts to acceptance or acquiescence by the tax department.
        • Potential Issues: While the intent is clear, there may be practical challenges in ensuring consistency in the department's approach across different years or assessees, especially if the factual matrix is similar but the tax effect differs.
      3. Sub-section (3): No Acquiescence by Non-filing of Appeal
        This sub-section bars an assessee from contending that the income-tax authority has acquiesced in the decision on the disputed issue merely because no appeal was filed in any case.
        • Interpretation: The provision seeks to prevent the doctrine of estoppel from being invoked against the revenue in such situations. It clarifies that the non-filing of an appeal (in accordance with the Board's instructions) should not be construed as acceptance of the decision by the department.
        • Legal Principle: This is consistent with the principle that administrative convenience or policy considerations (such as monetary limits) should not create substantive rights in favor of taxpayers in unrelated cases.
      4. Sub-section (4): Tribunal or Court to Have Regard to Board's Orders
        This sub-section mandates that the Appellate Tribunal or Court, while hearing such appeals, shall have regard to the Board's orders, instructions, or directions and the circumstances under which the appeal was filed or not filed.
        • Interpretation: This ensures judicial awareness of the policy framework within which the department operates. It also serves as a safeguard against adverse inferences being drawn solely on the ground of selective filing of appeals.
        • Ambiguities: The phrase "have regard to" is broad and leaves it to judicial discretion as to how much weight to accord to the Board's instructions in individual cases.

      Comparison with Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      Section 268A, inserted by the Finance Act, 2008 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1999, is the statutory predecessor to Clause 373. Both provisions are substantially similar in structure and intent, but there are notable differences and points of continuity.

      1. Scope of Appeals and References
        • Section 268A: Refers to the filing of "appeal or application for reference" by income-tax authorities.
        • Clause 373: Refers only to the filing of "appeal" by income-tax authorities; the phrase "application for reference" is omitted.
        • Analysis: The omission of "application for reference" in Clause 373 reflects the evolution of appellate procedures in Indian tax law. The reference procedure (where questions of law are referred to the High Court) has become largely obsolete after the introduction of direct appeals to the High Court on substantial questions of law. The 2025 Bill thus modernizes the language to align with current procedural realities.
      2. Board's Power to Set Monetary Limits
        • Both provisions empower the Board to fix monetary limits for filing appeals. The language in both is almost identical, ensuring continuity in the policy approach.
      3. Non-filing of Appeals and Preclusion in Other Cases
        • Both provisions clarify that non-filing of an appeal (or application for reference) in one case does not preclude the department from filing in other years or against other assessees on the same issue.
        • The only difference is the reference to "tax year" in Clause 373 versus "assessment year" in Section 268A, reflecting the proposed change in terminology in the new tax code.
      4. No Acquiescence by Non-filing
        • Both provisions explicitly bar the assessee from claiming that the department has acquiesced in a decision merely because no appeal was filed.
        • This is a direct response to judicial pronouncements where taxpayers have attempted to invoke the doctrine of estoppel against the revenue.
      5. Appellate Tribunal or Court to Have Regard to Board's Instructions
        • Both provisions require appellate forums to consider the Board's instructions and the circumstances of filing or non-filing of appeals.
        • This ensures a holistic approach to adjudication, taking into account administrative policies.
      6. Deeming Provision (Section 268A(5))
        • Section 268A(5): Contains a deeming provision that every order, instruction, or direction issued by the Board fixing monetary limits for filing appeals or applications for reference shall be deemed to have been issued under sub-section (1), and the provisions of sub-sections (2), (3), and (4) shall apply accordingly.
        • Clause 373: Does not contain an explicit deeming provision.
        • Analysis: The omission of a deeming provision in Clause 373 could be interpreted as a streamlining or simplification, possibly because the transitional need to validate past instructions is no longer relevant in the new code. Alternatively, it may be an oversight, or the drafters may have considered such a provision unnecessary under the new regime.

      Practical Implications

      • For Income-tax Authorities:
        • The Board retains the power to regulate the filing of appeals, ensuring that departmental resources are focused on cases with substantial revenue implications.
        • Authorities are protected from arguments that non-filing in one case binds them in other cases, preserving their ability to challenge adverse decisions when warranted.
      • For Assessees:
        • Assessees cannot claim that the department's failure to appeal in one case amounts to acceptance of the issue, thus preventing the misuse of administrative decisions as substantive legal precedents.
        • However, assessees may still rely on judicial precedents on the merits of the issue, irrespective of the department's litigation policy.
      • For Appellate Forums:
        • Tribunals and Courts are required to consider the Board's instructions and the factual context of each case, promoting a nuanced approach to adjudication.
        • This may also reduce the incidence of conflicting decisions arising from inconsistent departmental litigation practices.
      • On Compliance and Litigation:
        • The provisions encourage transparency and predictability in departmental litigation, which can lead to more informed compliance by taxpayers.
        • They also contribute to reducing the volume of tax litigation, which is a persistent challenge in the Indian judicial system.

      Potential Issues and Areas for Reform

      • Ambiguity in Judicial Discretion: The requirement for appellate forums to "have regard to" Board instructions is open-ended. Clearer guidelines could help ensure uniformity in judicial approach.
      • Absence of Deeming Provision in Clause 373: The lack of an explicit deeming provision validating past instructions (as in Section 268A(5)) may create transitional ambiguities unless addressed in the general provisions of the new Bill.
      • Review Mechanism: The Board's power is very broad and not subject to any explicit review or oversight. Consideration could be given to periodic parliamentary review or public disclosure of the criteria for setting monetary limits.
      • Consistency in Application: Ensuring that departmental officers apply the Board's instructions uniformly remains a practical challenge, especially in large and decentralized tax administrations.

      Conclusion

      Clause 373 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a continuation and modernization of the principles enshrined in Section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It reflects the evolving needs of tax administration by focusing on appeals (and omitting references to obsolete procedures such as applications for reference) and aligns with current judicial and administrative practices. The provision balances the need for efficient tax administration with the rights of assessees, while safeguarding the revenue's ability to contest adverse decisions where appropriate. While the core principles remain unchanged, the new clause streamlines the language and removes transitional provisions that are no longer necessary. The shift from "assessment year" to "tax year" and the omission of the deeming provision are notable changes, but the essential policy objectives-reducing frivolous litigation, ensuring administrative consistency, and preventing the misuse of non-filing as evidence of acquiescence-remain intact. Going forward, further clarity on the application of Board instructions by appellate forums and enhanced transparency in the setting of monetary limits could strengthen the effectiveness of this framework.


      Full Text:

      Clause 373 Filing of appeal or by income-tax authority.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax