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
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 ✕
🔎 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
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    TDS and International Transactions: Categorization of Payments under the ambit of "royalty" or "fees...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessment u/s 153C and Unexplained Investments: A Case Study in Legal Reasoning
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delhi High Court Elucidates on the Scope of Section 80IA in the Context of Business Expansion: Inter...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Penalty Limitations and Reasonable Cause: Navigating the Nuances of Tax Penalties
    Joint Insolvency Applications in Real Estate and Fulfillment of Threshold under IBC: Limitation and ...
    Digital Authentication in Tax Notices and the Interplay of Sections 61 and 74 in GST Law: Exploring ...
    Confirmation of GST demand by adjudicating Show Cause notice u/s 73: Procedural Requirements and Fai...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Duty of an EOU and the Fate of Obsolete Imports: Destroying Obsolete Goods without Paying Du...
    Understanding the Bail Denial: Case Analysis of a Money Laundering Offense
    When Taxpayers Make Mistakes in Filing GST Returns: Understanding the Legal Aspect of GST Rectificat...
    Navigating Insolvency Proceedings: Understanding CoC's Role and Section 65 of IBC in Corporate Liqu...
    In-depth Legal Examination of a High-Profile Tax Evasion and Forgery Case: Bail Application Denied
    Unraveling the Inverted Duty Structure: Complexities of ITC Refunds in GST
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication of Show Cause Notice (SCN): The law requires authorities to exercis...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Labyrinth of Second-Hand Goods Import: The Intersection of Trade Policy and Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Return Delays: High Court Rules on Tax Authority's Decision-Making Boundaries
    Navigating Tax Law Complexities: judicial approach towards the adjudication and appeal process
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Interplay of Sales and Bogus Purchases in Tax Evasion Cases: Assessing Tax Evasion Allegations
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Proportionality and Evidence in Tax Assessments: Accommodation entries, Bogus Purchase and Estimatio...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) Non-Deposit: Protecting the Rights of Taxpayers Ag...
❯❯
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
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty vs fees for included services: classification of cross border lead generation payments determines TDS obligation under tax treaty.
    Categorisation of cross border payments as royalty or fees for included services under the India US DTAA determines withholding under Section 195. Royalties cover payments for use of intellectual property; fees for included services require that technical knowledge, skill, or know how be made available. Services limited to lead generation, databases, or market facilitation without transfer of proprietary technical content do not qualify as either category and therefore fall outside the DTAA based TDS obligation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Search-based assessment jurisdiction governs treatment of unexplained investments when records are absent, shifting the burden of proof to the assessee.
    Assessment based on search-derived incriminating material applies when jurisdiction under search-based assessment is not contested, and unexplained investments are taxed depending on whether amounts are recorded in books of account. The assessee bears the onus to explain investments; absence of records, non-filing of returns and non-cooperation justify adverse inferences. Procedural elements such as delay condonation, set-aside orders and cooperation in reassessment affect the assessment process, while interest for non-furnishing of returns is tied to the timing of the regular assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of Section 80IA: expansion within the same undertaking does not automatically forfeit tax holiday eligibility.
    The court considered whether adding services and acquiring additional licenses by a telecommunications company created a new "undertaking" for tax holiday purposes. Finding that the company continued its original business using largely the same infrastructure and manpower, the court endorsed the Tribunal's conclusion that expansion within the same operational framework does not automatically constitute a separate undertaking and should not defeat eligibility for the tax holiday intended to encourage capital intensive projects.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation for tax penalties: emphasis on initiation of action preserves enforcement; reasonable cause evaluated by business realities.
    Applicability of the limitation period is determined by the initiation of action rather than the formal start of penalty proceedings, making the triggering of enforcement activity the operative moment for limitation. The reasonable cause doctrine is applied with attention to the appellant's bank like operations despite its cooperative structure, recognizing long standing practices and business realities as bearing on culpability for transaction handling contraventions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Joint application maintainability under IBC: interconnected real estate defaults can meet allottee threshold despite limitation objections.
    Maintainability of a joint application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is supported where separate corporate participants in a real estate project have interconnected obligations, allowing joinder in a single filing. The creditor threshold for initiating insolvency by allottees can include claims affected by limitation when the default is a continuous breach, producing a continuing cause of action under the Limitation Act and thereby supporting counting such claims toward the allottee threshold.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Digital authentication of tax notices enables enforcement despite verification procedures not being an absolute prerequisite for punitive action.
    The analysis focuses on the legal effect of digitally authenticated GST portal notices, the sufficiency of portal-based service for triggering taxpayer obligations, and the distinction between routine verification of returns and discretionary enforcement actions for suspected fraudulent defaults; it observes that verification is not an absolute prerequisite to initiate enforcement where officers reasonably suspect fraud, and that failure to engage with portal notices weakens natural justice claims.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice breach: non self contained, short notice show cause demands require reissuance with fair opportunity.
    A show cause notice initiating an adjudicatory demand must be self contained, supply sufficient material for response, and afford a reasonable opportunity to reply; an inadequate content and an unreasonably short response period (well below the preferred thirty days and below a minimum of fifteen days) violate audi alteram partem and procedural fairness. Defective notices warrant issuance of a fresh, legally valid notice rectifying the procedural defects, and may attract costs consequences against the issuing authority.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Destruction of obsolete imports: destruction with Customs permission can relieve full customs duty subject to procedural compliance.
    Whether imported raw materials and components rendered obsolete may be destroyed without paying customs duty where the unit obtains Customs permission and offers to pay duty on scrap value; reliance was placed on the Foreign Trade Policy, Circular No. 60/1999 Cus and an amendment to the governing Notification which exempts duty when goods are destroyed with Customs' permission, balanced against the Revenue's contention that non use within prescribed time attracts duty.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Show AI Summary
    Money laundering offence: bail refused where admissible witness statements and accused failed to discharge burden showing non involvement.
    Bail was refused where admissible witness statements provided a prima facie basis to implicate the appellant in money laundering and the accused failed to show non involvement or low risk of reoffending. Money laundering was treated as an independent offence tied to dealings in proceeds, admissible statements supported inferences from financial transactions and concealment, parity was held non automatic, and discretionary release for trial delay does not guarantee bail in serious economic offences.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST rectification: inadvertent filing errors may be amended when no revenue loss, encouraging taxpayer-friendly compliance.
    Rectification of GST return entries is permissible where errors are inadvertent and do not cause revenue loss. The court interprets CGST/MGST filing and correction provisions purposively, recognising practical difficulties faced by taxpayers and the central importance of accurate returns for downstream GST processes. Authorities are urged to permit amendments by online or manual means in cases of genuine mistake without fiscal prejudice, promoting a taxpayer friendly and pragmatic approach consistent with other high court decisions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    CoC autonomy in insolvency: CoC may decide liquidation prior to plan confirmation and section 65 targets malicious filings.
    Committee of Creditors autonomy over liquidation is recognized: the CoC may lawfully decide liquidation under Section 33(2) before confirmation of a resolution plan, and Section 65 requires clear evidence of filings made for purposes other than insolvency resolution before imposing penal consequences.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Bail considerations: Serious economic offence allegations constrain pretrial liberty when evidence tampering and investigative integrity risks exist.
    Bail considerations focus on the seriousness of alleged tax evasion, forgery and conspiracy under the IPC, the risk of evidence tampering or witness influence, and the accused's antecedents; ongoing investigation complexity and public interest in protecting the exchequer weigh against interim release. Arguments relying on GST compounding or procedural non-compliance are distinguished from IPC offences, and precedents concerning customs or GST matters are treated as contextually different when assessing pretrial liberty.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit refund: prior IGST refunds do not bar unutilized ITC claims; supporting evidence required for reconsideration.
    The court analysed entitlement to refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit under an inverted duty structure and held that prior IGST refunds for zero-rated supplies do not automatically bar a Section 54 refund claim; absence of debit entries alone cannot justify rejection. The decision emphasises the requirement to submit comprehensive supporting documents distinguishing inputs affected by the inverted duty structure and directs reconsideration allowing additional evidence and a reasoned order consistent with statutory conditions and principles of natural justice.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication: undue delay undermines natural justice and precludes indefinite postponement of proceedings.
    Adjudication of an excise Show Cause Notice must occur within a reasonable time so as to preserve evidentiary integrity and witness availability; prolonged inaction between issuance of an SCN and hearing prejudices the respondent, infringes the principles of natural justice, and requires statutory time-limit language to be interpreted to prevent indefinite delay.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Second-hand goods import classification clarified: multifunction capital equipment falls under unrestricted category, subject to compliance and duty measures.
    The court determined that imported second-hand multifunction print and copying machines fall within the Foreign Trade Policy 2023 unrestricted category I(d) for second-hand capital goods and were incorrectly classified as prohibited by customs; it contrasted the 2023 and 2019 policies, relied on precedent, and directed the customs department to pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time while permitting provisional measures subject to enhanced duty payment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: focus on admissibility of the request, not the substantive merits of the tax claim.
    The legal principle requires that the authorized officer considering a condonation application under Section 119(2)(b) confine inquiry to the admissibility of the request and the justification for delay; assessment of the substantive merits of the taxpayer's income or loss claim is not part of the condonation exercise, and evidentiary review is limited to matters relevant to excusing the delay.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under CGST law prompts appeal remedy and partial refund direction, preserving pre-deposit and taxpayer rights.
    The adjudicating officer withdrew the demand for inadmissible input tax credit and related interest and penalty, while separately imposing a penalty under Section 122(1)(vii) of the CGST Act adjusted against amounts paid by the petitioner. The court recognized the petitioner's appellate remedy and directed a partial refund subject to retention as pre-deposit, reflecting the procedural interplay between administrative adjudication and judicial review and safeguarding taxpayer rights during appeal.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Interplay of sales and bogus purchases: sales consistency limits rejection of purchases and favors gross profit alignment for taxation.
    For traders, rejection of purchases cannot proceed in isolation where declared sales exhibit regularity; cost of goods sold must be coherent with recorded sales. Tax adjustments should compare differential gross profit margins and align challenged purchases with genuine GP rates, allowing proportional taxation reconciliations rather than adding the entire value of disputed purchases as income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Proportionality in tax assessments preserved: additions limited to profit element where sales are accepted, not entire purchase.
    Alleged accommodation entries may be restricted to taxation of the profit element where sales from those purchases are accepted; the tribunal limited an addition accordingly and the court upheld that proportionality. Separately, an enhanced gross profit addition was deleted because there was no concrete evidence to displace the assessee's declared book results; the court agreed that revenue must meet the evidentiary burden before altering declared figures.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax Deducted at Source protection: taxpayers not liable for employer's failure to deposit TDS; refunds should not be adjusted.
    The note explains that TDS credit protection bars holding an assessee liable for tax already deducted by an employer who failed to remit it; employers bear the deposit obligation as tax-collecting agents. Adjusting taxpayer refunds or using coercive measures to recover demands arising from employer non-deposit contravenes the protective principle and indirect recovery limits, and authorities should correct credit mismatches rather than treat deductees as liable.

    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 Registered Valuer Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 513 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      17 July, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Clause 513 Appearance by registered valuer in certain matters.

      Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Introduction

      Clause 513 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, and Section 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, both address the procedural right of an assessee to be represented by a registered valuer before income-tax authorities or the Appellate Tribunal in matters concerning the valuation of assets. The ability to appear through a registered valuer is a significant procedural safeguard, particularly given the technical and specialized nature of valuation disputes within the income tax framework. The introduction of Clause 513 in the proposed Bill signals an effort to modernize, clarify, and potentially harmonize the procedural aspects of appearance by registered valuers with contemporary regulatory and professional standards. This commentary provides a comprehensive analysis of Clause 513, its objectives, operative features, and implications, followed by a detailed comparative analysis with Section 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The discussion is structured to address each provision's legislative intent, scope, practical ramifications, and interpretative nuances, culminating in a critical assessment of potential reforms and future directions.

      Objective and Purpose

      Legislative Intent and Policy Rationale:- The core objective behind permitting appearance by a registered valuer is to facilitate the fair and efficient resolution of valuation-related disputes, recognizing the highly technical nature of such matters. Taxpayers, who may lack expertise in asset valuation, are thus enabled to engage professionals with specialized knowledge, thereby ensuring that their interests are adequately represented and that the proceedings are informed by expert input. Both Clause 513 and Section 287A reflect a legislative policy of procedural fairness and access to technical representation, but Clause 513 in the new Bill also appears to be part of a broader effort to update and codify procedural rights in line with current regulatory and professional standards for valuers.

      Historical Background:- Section 287A was introduced by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1972, effective from 1 January 1973, at a time when valuation disputes were becoming increasingly complex, particularly with the advent of wealth tax and the need for standardized valuation practices. The provision drew upon the concept of a "registered valuer" as defined under the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, to ensure that only qualified professionals could represent assessees in valuation matters. Clause 513, as proposed in the Income Tax Bill, 2025, updates this framework, reflecting changes in the regulatory environment for valuers, including the establishment of new registration and oversight mechanisms.

      Detailed Analysis of Clause 513 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Breakdown of Key Provisions

      1. Sub-Clause (1): Right to Representation by Registered Valuer
        Clause 513(1) provides that any assessee entitled or required to attend before an income-tax authority or the Appellate Tribunal in matters relating to the valuation of any asset may attend through a registered valuer.
        • Scope:The provision applies to all valuation matters, whether the attendance is required or merely permitted, and covers proceedings before both income-tax authorities and the Appellate Tribunal.
        • Nature of Representation:The use of the word "may attend through a registered valuer" provides the assessee with a discretionary right, not an obligation, to be represented by a registered valuer.
        • Technical Focus:The provision is specifically limited to "matters relating to the valuation of any asset," underscoring the technical nature of the representation permitted.
      2. Sub-Clause (2): Exception for Personal Examination
        Clause 513(2) carves out an exception, providing that the right to representation by a registered valuer does not apply where the assessee is required to attend personally for examination on oath or affirmation u/s 246.
        • Purpose of Exception: This exception preserves the authority's power to directly examine the assessee in certain circumstances, typically where personal knowledge or intent is at issue and cannot be substituted by professional representation.
        • Reference to Section 246: The cross-reference to section 246 (presumably the section in the new Bill governing examination on oath or affirmation) ensures consistency with other procedural safeguards and investigative powers.
      3. Sub-Clause (3): Definition of Registered Valuer
        Clause 513(3) defines "registered valuer" as a person registered u/s 514 of the Bill.
        • Regulatory Clarity:By providing an internal reference to section 514, the Bill seeks to establish a self-contained and updated regulatory framework for valuers, moving away from reliance on definitions in other statutes such as the Wealth-tax Act.
        • Professionalization: This signals a move towards a more robust, centralized, and possibly more stringent regime for the registration and oversight of valuers.

      Interpretative Considerations and Ambiguities

      • Scope of "Valuation of Any Asset": The phrase is broad and may encompass a wide range of assets (tangible and intangible). However, the provision does not specify whether it applies to both direct and indirect valuation issues, or to disputes over methodology versus quantum.
      • Nature of Proceedings Covered: The provision covers both "entitled or required" attendance, suggesting it applies to both voluntary and mandatory appearances, but does not clarify whether it extends to all stages of proceedings or only to hearings.
      • Exclusion for Personal Examination: The exception is clear, but the threshold for when an assessee is "required to attend personally" may be subject to administrative discretion, potentially leading to inconsistent application.
      • Definition of Registered Valuer: By tying the definition to section 514, the Bill centralizes regulatory authority but may also create transitional issues for valuers registered under previous regimes.

      Comparative Analysis with Section 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961

      Textual Comparison

      AspectSection 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961Clause 513 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025
      Right to RepresentationAssessee may attend by a registered valuer in valuation matters before income-tax authority or Appellate TribunalAssessee may attend through a registered valuer in matters relating to valuation of any asset before income-tax authority or Appellate Tribunal
      Exception for Personal AttendanceDoes not apply when required to attend personally u/s 131 for examination on oath or affirmationDoes not apply when required to attend personally u/s 246 for examination on oath or affirmation
      Definition of Registered ValuerAs per clause (oaa) of section 2 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957As per section 514 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025

      Key Differences and Their Implications

      1. Reference to the Definition of Registered Valuer
        • Section 287A relies on the definition in the Wealth-tax Act, which may be outdated or inconsistent with current professional standards.
        • Clause 513 creates a self-contained definition by referencing section 514 of the new Bill, likely reflecting updated registration, qualification, and regulatory requirements.
        • Implication: This shift modernizes the regulatory framework and may improve the quality and accountability of valuers appearing in tax proceedings.
      2. Reference to Examination on Oath or Affirmation
        • Section 287A refers to section 131 of the 1961 Act, which deals with the powers of authorities regarding discovery, production of evidence, and attendance for examination.
        • Clause 513 refers to section 246 of the new Bill, indicating a renumbering or restructuring of the procedural provisions.
        • Implication: The substance remains similar, but the cross-reference ensures that the procedural framework is internally consistent within the new Bill.
      3. Wording and Scope
        • Both provisions are similarly worded, but Clause 513 uses "may attend through a registered valuer," while Section 287A uses "may attend by a registered valuer." The difference is largely stylistic and does not appear to alter the substantive right.
        • Clause 513's language is slightly more modern and precise, aligning with contemporary drafting standards.
      4. Regulatory Modernization
        • The move from reliance on the Wealth-tax Act's definition to an internally defined regime for valuers is significant, as it allows the legislature to set qualifications, standards, and disciplinary mechanisms that are tailored to current needs.
        • This may also facilitate harmonization with the regulatory regime for valuers under other statutes, such as the Companies Act, 2013, which introduced a new regime for registered valuers.

      Potential Areas of Overlap and Conflict

      • During the transition from the 1961 Act to the 2025 Bill, there may be issues regarding the recognition of valuers registered under the old regime. The Bill should ideally provide transitional provisions to clarify the status of such valuers.
      • There may also be interpretative challenges in aligning the scope of "valuation matters" under the new Bill with established jurisprudence under the 1961 Act.

      Practical Implications for Stakeholders

      A. For Businesses and Individuals

      • The continued right to representation by a registered valuer is crucial, especially for corporates and high-net-worth individuals with complex assets.
      • The modernization of the regulatory regime for valuers may increase confidence in the integrity and quality of valuation evidence.
      • Assessees must ensure that their valuers are registered under the new regime to avoid procedural objections.

      B. For Registered Valuers

      • The new regime may require existing valuers to update their registration or meet new qualification/experience criteria.
      • There may be a need for continuing professional development to comply with updated standards.

      C. For Tax Authorities and the Tribunal

      • The updated framework may necessitate training or capacity building to assess and challenge technical valuation evidence effectively.
      • The authorities may also need to update their procedural manuals and forms to reflect the new regime.

      Conclusion

      Clause 513 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, represents a thoughtful continuation and modernization of the procedural right of assessees to be represented by registered valuers in valuation matters. By updating the definition and regulatory framework for valuers, the Bill seeks to enhance the quality, credibility, and integrity of valuation evidence in tax proceedings. The exceptions for personal examination preserve the authorities' investigative powers, striking an appropriate balance between procedural fairness and administrative efficacy. The comparative analysis with Section 287A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, reveals that while the core right remains unchanged, the new Bill introduces important regulatory and drafting improvements. The shift to an internally defined regime for valuers is particularly significant, aligning the tax law with contemporary professional standards and regulatory practices. Stakeholders must, however, be alert to transitional issues and ensure compliance with the updated regime. As valuation disputes continue to be a critical aspect of tax litigation, the role of registered valuers-and the statutory framework governing their participation-will remain central to the fair and effective administration of tax law. Further reforms may be required to address emerging challenges, such as the valuation of intangible assets, digital assets, and cross-border interests, but Clause 513 provides a strong foundation for the future.


      Full Text:

      Clause 513 Appearance by registered valuer in certain matters.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax