Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ 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 characters 0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

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.
Relevance Default Date
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of SCHEDULE II "INCOME NOT TO BE INCLUDED IN TOTAL INCOME" between the Income-Tax Act, 20...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of SCHEDULE I "CONDITIONS FOR CERTAIN ACTIVITIES NOT TO CONSTITUTE BUSINESS CONNECTION IN...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 536 "Repeal and savings." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 524 "Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc." between the Income-Tax ...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 515 "Appearance by authorised representative." between the Income-Tax Act, 202...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 511 "Furnishing of report in respect of international group." between the Inco...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 506 "Furnishing of information or documents by an Indian concern in certain ca...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 505 "Submission of statement by a non-resident having liaison office." between...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 500 "Provisional attachment to protect revenue in certain cases." between the ...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 489 "Presumption as to assets, books of account, etc., in certain cases." betw...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 488 "Offences by Hindu undivided family." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 487 "Abetment of false return, etc." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as pass...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 484 "Abetment of false return, etc." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as pass...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 483 "Falsification of books of account or document, etc." between the Income-T...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 479 "Failure to furnish returns of income." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 478 "Wilful attempt to evade tax, etc." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as p...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 476 "Failure to pay tax collected at source." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 476 "Failure to pay tax to credit of Central Government under Chapter XIX-B" b...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 475 "Removal, concealment, transfer or delivery of property to prevent tax " b...
    Act Rules Income Tax
    Comparison of section 470 "Penalty not to be imposed in certain cases." between the Income-Tax Act, ...
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Life insurance exemption tightened by period, premium ratio and aggregate premium tests, altering tax treatment of policy and IFSC receipts.
Schedule II excludes specified classes of income from total income while imposing conditional tests on life insurance and retirement/savings receipts. Life insurance exclusions depend on policy issue periods, premium to sum assured ratios, aggregate premium ceilings and express ineligibility for certain receipts. Provident fund interest attributable to large post cut off contributions is excluded from exemption with the non excluded portion to be computed as prescribed. The Schedule adds an equalisation levy exclusion interacting with treaty notifications and treats IFSC issued policies differently under a targeted aggregate premium carve out.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Business connection safe harbour for non-resident funds: compliance thresholds determine Indian tax nexus exclusion.
The Schedule establishes a safe harbour whereby certain non-resident investment funds and eligible fund managers will not constitute a business connection in India if they satisfy exhaustive investor-composition, concentration, corpus, independence, non-control, prohibited-associate-investment and arm's-length remuneration conditions, with specified carve-outs, transitional reliefs, registration requirements under prescribed securities-regulator frameworks, and filing and record keeping obligations to substantiate compliance.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Savings on repeal preserve procedural and substantive continuity for matters tied to earlier tax years under the repealed regime.
The repeal provision preserves continuation of rights, obligations and proceedings relating to tax years beginning before the statutory cut-off by deeming prior actions, elections, penalties, refunds, recovery, carry-forwards of losses, credits and depreciation to remain effective and by allowing pending and certain later-initiated proceedings to be conducted under the repealed procedural rules; it invokes the General Clauses Act for repeal effect and specifies fallback mechanics for schemes where no corresponding provision exists in the new Act.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Presumption of ownership and authenticity expands to electronic records, increasing evidentiary weight in tax proceedings.
The provision establishes rebuttable presumptions in proceedings under the Income tax enactment that items found in a search or survey-or delivered to a requisitioning officer-belong to the person in whose possession or control they are found and that books, documents, signatures and executions are true/authentic; the enacted text expressly extends those presumptions to electronic information and computer systems and adds a specific presumption that recorded electronic exchanges are exchanged between the purported parties.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Authorised representative rules limit who may represent taxpayers, set disqualification grounds, and preserve appeal rights.
The provision permits an assessee to attend proceedings before income tax authorities and the Appellate Tribunal through an authorised representative drawn from an enumerated list, subject to written authorisation and exclusions; personal attendance is required where examination on oath or affirmation is mandated. The definition of authorised representative and of "accountant" contains specific exceptions to prevent conflicts of interest, while disqualification rules-based on dismissal from service, insolvency, specified convictions or prior penalties-apply with procedural safeguards including opportunity to be heard and a one month appeal to the Board. Several qualifications and categories are to be determined by subordinate prescription, and transitional cross references to prior statutes determine legacy practitioner recognition.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Country-by-country reporting requires Indian resident entities to notify authorities and file consolidated international group reports.
Section 511 establishes a country by country reporting regime requiring Indian resident constituent entities with non resident parents to notify the prescribed income tax authority regarding designation as an alternate reporting entity and to provide parent/alternate details, while Indian resident parent or alternate reporting entities must furnish consolidated reports in the prescribed form and manner; fallback filing applies where foreign jurisdictions do not file or exchange reports or where a systemic failure is intimated, and exemptions apply if consolidated group revenue falls below a prescribed threshold.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Information-furnishing obligation: Indian concerns must produce prescribed documents when foreign interests derive value from India assets.
An information-furnishing obligation requires an Indian concern to provide prescribed information or documents to the prescribed income-tax authority when a foreign company's or entity's shares or interests derive substantially their value from assets located in India and those assets are held, directly or indirectly, through the Indian concern; specific documents, the authority, the period and the manner of furnishing are to be specified by subordinate prescription.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reporting obligation for liaison offices: annual statement to tax authorities subject to deadlines and particulars as prescribed.
Non-residents with RBI/FEMA authorised liaison offices must annually prepare and deliver to the Assessing Officer a statement of the office's activities for the tax year in such form, containing such particulars and within such period as may be prescribed, with the deadline and particulars to be specified by subordinate legislation rather than fixed in the statute.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Provisional attachment protects revenue during assessments, requiring competent authority approval and revocation on provision of bank guarantees.
Clause 500 permits an Assessing Officer, with prior Competent Authority approval and by written order, to provisionally attach property during assessment, reassessment of escaped income or specified penalty proceedings; attachment follows the statutory attachment procedure and valuation by a Valuation Officer. Attachment is revocable on furnishing a scheduled bank guarantee generally equal to fair market value (or a lower guarantee if accepted); guarantees may be invoked on default. Temporal limits apply (initial six months with limited extensions) and proceeds are adjusted against existing demands with balances deposited in designated accounts.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Presumption as to assets extended to electronic information and computer systems when tendered as prosecutorial evidence.
The statute extends the evidentiary presumption applicable to assets, books of account and documents found in searches or taken into custody to include information in electronic form and computer systems, applying the presumptive framework when such items are tendered in evidence and qualifying that application by the phrase "so far as may be, apply"; the Act cross-references statutory definitions for electronic information and computer systems to ensure consistent meaning.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Karta liability and member culpability: members can be prosecuted regardless of Karta's due diligence defence under the revised provision.
The provision deems the Karta guilty for offences committed by an HUF unless he proves absence of knowledge or that he exercised all due diligence; members are separately liable if the offence was committed with their consent or connivance or is attributable to their neglect, and the Act clarifies that such member liability applies irrespective of both the Karta's deemed guilt and his due-diligence defence.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Corporate vicarious liability tightened: personal liability now operates notwithstanding due diligence where consent, connivance or neglect is shown.
Section 487 creates both a deeming rule treating companies and those in charge as guilty for corporate tax offences and a separate personal-liability route making directors, managers, secretaries, officers, partners and controlling members individually culpable where an offence is committed with their consent, connivance or attributable to their neglect; a statutory defence allows persons deemed guilty to avoid liability by proving lack of knowledge or that they exercised all due diligence, but the enacted text makes the personal-liability route operate irrespective of the deeming rule and the due diligence defence.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Abetment of false return: two-tier custodial penalties and fine where tax impact determines higher or lower sentencing.
Abetment of false return criminalises abetting or inducing another to make a false tax-related account, statement or declaration where the abettor knows it is false or does not believe it to be true, and prescribes a two tier sentencing regime based on the monetary magnitude of tax, penalty or interest evaded or wilfully attempted to be evaded; textual differences between the Bill and the enacted section are limited to phrasing around liability to fine and an editorial sentence, with no observable change to imprisonment ranges or threshold.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Falsification of books: criminalises willful false entries to enable another's tax evasion, allowing prosecution without proving actual evasion.
Section 483 proscribes falsification of books or other documents when a person wilfully makes or causes a false entry or statement, knowing it to be false or not believing it to be true, with intent to enable another to evade tax, interest or penalty; the offence carries rigorous imprisonment and fine, and it is not necessary to prove that the other person actually succeeded in evading tax.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Failure to furnish tax returns: criminal penalties with tiered custody and limited safe harbour for late filing.
Criminal liability is imposed for wilful failure to furnish a required return of income, with a two-tiered custodial and fine regime linked to the amount of tax evaded. A limited bar to prosecution exists where the return is subsequently furnished within the procedural time references or, for non-companies, where the residual tax shortfall after qualifying payments falls below a de minimis threshold. The scope of the safe harbour depends on the timing rules in the cross referenced procedural subsection.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Wilful attempt to evade tax: criminalises deliberate falsification and omissions, with tiered imprisonment and fines.
Section 478 criminalises a wilful attempt to evade tax and wilful under reporting by prescribing tiered rigorous imprisonment and fines, and it lists illustrative acts-false entries, omissions, possession of falsified books and conduct enabling evasion. The Act relocates and rephrases fine and penalty preservation language into a standalone non prejudice clause and tightens causation wording in an illustrative sub clause. Definitions of key terms and procedural or evidentiary standards are not provided in the text.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Failure to remit tax collected at source criminalised, exposing collectors to imprisonment and fine; exception for timely remittance.
Failure to remit to Government the tax collected at source is a penal offence punishable by imprisonment and fine, targeting persons who collect tax at source and imposing personal liability for payment to Government credit. A narrow temporal exception excludes application where payment has been made on or before the time prescribed for filing the relevant statement, and the provision contains no mitigating grounds, mens rea gradation, or procedural compounding mechanisms.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Failure to remit withheld tax attracts criminal liability including imprisonment and fine; safe harbour if credited before filing deadline.
Failure to remit taxes deducted under Chapter XIX-B or required by specified Notes to the Table in section 393 constitutes a criminal offence punishable by rigorous imprisonment and fine; the offence applies where a person fails to pay amounts to the credit of the Central Government, subject to a temporal safe harbour if payment is made or credited on or before the time prescribed for filing the relevant statement.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Fraudulent disposition of property to frustrate tax execution now criminalised, tied specifically to a certificate drawn under section 413.
The offence criminalises anyone who fraudulently removes, conceals, transfers or delivers any property or interest therein with intent to prevent such property or interest from being taken in execution of a certificate drawn u/s 413; punishment is rigorous imprisonment up to two years and a fine. The enacted text replaces the Bill's broader "as prescribed" formulation with a direct reference to section 413, clarifying the instrument whose execution the offence seeks to frustrate. The clause contains no exceptions, definitions of "fraudulently," or evidentiary rules.
Act Rules Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reasonable cause defence prevents penalties when a taxpayer proves it, expanding protection in the enacted provision.
Section 470 bars imposition of penalties under the listed provisions where a person or assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure; it frames the exception as prevailing irrespective of anything in those provisions and places the burden of proof on the person, while not defining "reasonable cause" or prescribing standards, procedures, or timing for such proof.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Changing Face of Criminal Procedure in Income Tax Offence Prosecution : Clause 498 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 280D of Income-tax Act, 1961

15 July, 2025

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Clause 498 Application of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to proceedings before Special Court.

Income Tax Bill, 2025

Introduction

Clause 498 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 and Section 280D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are statutory provisions that govern the procedural framework for the prosecution of offences under the respective Acts before Special Courts. Both provisions address the application of general criminal procedural laws to proceedings under the Income Tax regime, the appointment and qualification of prosecutors, and the status of such prosecutors before Special Courts. While Section 280D, introduced by the Finance Act, 2012, invoked the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), Clause 498 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 proposes to substitute the CrPC with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), reflecting a significant legislative shift. This commentary provides a comprehensive analysis of Clause 498, its objectives, structure, practical implications, and a clause-by-clause comparison with Section 280D, highlighting the legal and policy implications of this transition.

Objective and Purpose

The primary objective of both Clause 498 and Section 280D is to establish a clear procedural framework for the prosecution of income tax offences before Special Courts. These provisions ensure that proceedings are conducted in accordance with established criminal procedure, that prosecutors are appointed with requisite qualifications, and that the administration of justice is streamlined and consistent with broader criminal law principles.

The legislative intent behind these provisions can be summarized as follows:

  • To provide procedural uniformity and legal certainty in the prosecution of tax offences.
  • To ensure that the prosecution is conducted by qualified legal professionals with adequate experience and knowledge of law.
  • To enable the Central Government to appoint Special Public Prosecutors for complex or significant cases requiring specialized attention.
  • To align the prosecution mechanism under the Income Tax law with the prevailing general criminal procedure statute (CrPC or BNSS).

The shift from the CrPC to the BNSS in Clause 498 is part of a broader legislative and policy initiative to modernize and indigenize India's criminal procedure framework. The BNSS, enacted in 2023, is intended to replace the colonial-era CrPC with a more contemporary, citizen-centric code. Consequently, Clause 498's reference to the BNSS signifies the legislature's intent to ensure that tax prosecutions are conducted under the most current procedural law, thereby harmonizing tax enforcement with the evolving criminal justice system.

Detailed Analysis of Clause 498 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

Application of BNSS to Special Court Proceedings

Clause 498(1) provides that, unless otherwise specified in the Income Tax Bill, the provisions of the BNSS, including those relating to bail and bonds, shall apply to proceedings before a Special Court. Furthermore, the person conducting the prosecution before the Special Court is deemed to be a Public Prosecutor.

This sub-clause establishes two important legal norms:

  • Application of BNSS: All procedural aspects, such as investigation, trial, evidence, bail, and other matters, are to be governed by the BNSS, unless the Income Tax Bill provides otherwise. This ensures procedural consistency and leverages the comprehensive framework of the BNSS for tax prosecutions.
  • Status of Prosecutor: The prosecutor in such proceedings is statutorily deemed to be a Public Prosecutor, thereby conferring upon them all the rights, duties, and protections available to Public Prosecutors under the BNSS.

Appointment of Special Public Prosecutors

Clause 498(2) empowers the Central Government to appoint a Special Public Prosecutor for any specific case or group of cases. This discretionary power is significant in cases involving complex, high-profile, or sensitive tax offences, where specialized legal expertise may be required.

The provision allows the government flexibility in resource allocation and ensures that particularly challenging cases can be handled by prosecutors with specialized skills, thereby enhancing the effectiveness of enforcement.

Qualification Criteria for Prosecutors

Clause 498(3) prescribes that no person shall be qualified to be appointed as a Public Prosecutor or a Special Public Prosecutor under this section unless they have been in practice as an advocate for at least seven years and possess special knowledge of law.

This clause ensures the appointment of experienced and competent legal professionals, which is critical for the prosecution of complex tax offences. The requirement of "special knowledge of law" further underscores the necessity for expertise, not merely experience, thereby raising the standard of prosecution.

Deeming Provision and Reference to BNSS

Clause 498(4) provides that every person appointed as a Public Prosecutor or Special Public Prosecutor under this section shall be deemed to be a Public Prosecutor within the meaning of section 2(v) of the BNSS, and the provisions of the BNSS shall apply accordingly.

This deeming provision ensures that all legal consequences, powers, and duties associated with Public Prosecutors under the BNSS are automatically extended to persons appointed under Clause 498. It also eliminates any potential ambiguity regarding the legal status or authority of such prosecutors.

Comparative Analysis with Section 280D of the Income-tax Act, 1961

1. Statutory Reference: BNSS vs. CrPC

The most significant distinction between Clause 498 and Section 280D is the replacement of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS). The BNSS, as a successor to the CrPC, is intended to modernize and adapt criminal procedure to contemporary Indian realities, emphasizing citizen-centric justice, digital processes, and streamlined investigation and trial mechanisms.

While both provisions ensure that the general criminal procedural law applies to tax prosecutions, the adoption of the BNSS in Clause 498 marks a legislative update reflecting the government's intention to keep the procedural framework current and consistent with the overarching criminal law regime.

2. Structure and Content: Substantive Parity

A clause-by-clause comparison reveals that the structure and substantive content of Clause 498 and Section 280D are largely identical, with the primary difference being the statutory reference (BNSS vs. CrPC) and the corresponding definitions sections (section 2(v) of BNSS vs. section 2(u) of CrPC).

Provision Clause 498 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Section 280D of the Income-tax Act, 1961
Application of Procedural Law BNSS, 2023 CrPC, 1973
Scope (Bail, Bonds, etc.) Explicitly included Explicitly included
Deeming Prosecutor as Public Prosecutor Yes Yes
Appointment of Special Public Prosecutor Permitted for any case/class/group Permitted for any case/class/group
Qualification Criteria 7 years advocacy + special knowledge of law 7 years advocacy + special knowledge of law
Deeming Provision (Definition) Section 2(v) of BNSS 2023 Section 2(u) of CrPC

3. Ambiguities and Interpretational Issues

Both provisions are drafted with clarity, but some potential interpretational issues may arise:

  • "Special knowledge of law": The phrase is not defined and may give rise to disputes regarding the precise qualifications required. Judicial interpretation or executive clarification may be necessary.
  • Transition Issues: The transition from CrPC to BNSS may create procedural uncertainties for cases initiated under the old regime but pending at the time of enactment. Transitional provisions or judicial clarification may be required to address such scenarios.
  • Overlap with Other Laws: In cases involving offences under multiple statutes, the interplay between BNSS and other special laws may require careful harmonization to avoid conflicts.

4. Unique Features and Policy Implications

The adoption of the BNSS in Clause 498 is a unique feature, reflecting the government's commitment to updating the legal framework in line with new legislative developments. The BNSS introduces several innovations, such as digital procedures, witness protection, and enhanced victim rights, which may indirectly impact tax prosecutions.

Additionally, the explicit provision for the appointment of Special Public Prosecutors in both provisions ensures that complex or high-value cases can be prosecuted with the requisite expertise, thereby strengthening enforcement.

Practical Implications

For Stakeholders

  • Accused Persons: Accused individuals in tax prosecution cases will be subject to the procedures, rights, and remedies available under the BNSS, including those relating to bail, trial procedure, and appeals.
  • Prosecutors: Prosecutors must meet higher qualification standards and are endowed with the powers and responsibilities of Public Prosecutors under the BNSS, ensuring professional conduct and accountability.
  • Regulators and Enforcement Agencies: Tax authorities and enforcement agencies must align their procedures and case preparation with the requirements of the BNSS, necessitating training and process adjustments.
  • Legal Community: Advocates seeking appointment as prosecutors must possess at least seven years' experience and special legal knowledge, potentially raising the bar for appointments.

Compliance and Procedural Impact

  • All procedural steps in prosecution, from investigation to trial and sentencing, will be governed by the BNSS, requiring adaptation by all stakeholders.
  • Appointment processes for prosecutors must ensure compliance with the enhanced qualification criteria.
  • Special Public Prosecutors can be appointed for complex or sensitive cases, providing flexibility and specialization in prosecution.

Conclusion

Clause 498 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 is a forward-looking statutory provision that seeks to align the prosecution of tax offences with the latest criminal procedure code, the BNSS, 2023. Its structure and content are substantially similar to Section 280D of the Income-tax Act, 1961, with the key difference being the replacement of the CrPC with the BNSS. This change is emblematic of a broader legislative trend towards modernization and indigenization of India's criminal justice system.

The provision maintains high standards for the appointment of prosecutors, ensures procedural uniformity, and provides flexibility for the appointment of Special Public Prosecutors. While the transition to the BNSS may necessitate adjustments in practice and procedure, it is expected to enhance the efficiency, fairness, and effectiveness of tax prosecutions. Areas that may require further clarification include the definition of "special knowledge of law" and the handling of transitional cases.

Overall, Clause 498 represents a significant but evolutionary change in the procedural landscape of tax prosecutions, reflecting the legislature's intent to keep the law current, effective, and in harmony with broader legal reforms.


Full Text:

Clause 498 Application of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to proceedings before Special Court.

Topics

Acts Income Tax