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
    Doctrine of Reasonable Cause in Tax Penalties : Clause 470 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Voluntary Disclosure and Penalty Waiver under Indian Tax Law : Clause 469 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance with TDCAN/TAN Requirements : Clause 468 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Penalty Provision for PAN/Aadhaar Non-Compliance in Indian Tax Law : Clause 467 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for deterrence against non-cooperation with tax authorities : Clause 466 of Incom...
    Procedural Defaults and Penalties in Indian Tax Law : Clause 465 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Ensuring Compliance Among Tax-Exempt Entities : Clause 464 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Professionals(i.e. Accountant, Marchant Banker, Registered Valuer) Accountability under Indian Incom...
    Enforcement of Information Disclosure in Cross-Border Transactions : Clause 462 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-Filing and Incorrect Filing of TDS/TCS Statements : Clause 461 of the Inc...
    Enforcement of Reporting Obligations by a non-resident having liaison office : Clause 460 of Income ...
    Penalties for Reporting Non-Compliance by Resident constituent entity of an international group unde...
    Legal Implications of Non-Compliance with Reporting Requirements : Clause 458 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Strengthening Transfer Pricing Enforcement : Clause 457 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 271...
    Compliance and Penalty Mechanisms for Investment Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 456 of the Inco...
    Penalties for Inaccurate Financial Reporting under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 455 of the Income ...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance in Financial Transaction Reporting : Clause 454 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-compliant Loan Repayments in India's Income Tax Law : Clause 453 of the I...
    Mandatory Electronic Payments and Penalty Regimes : Clause 452 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
    Evolving Penalty Regimes for Monetary Transaction Violations : Clause 451 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
❯❯
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
    Reasonable cause defense protects taxpayers from penalties for bona fide, non culpable defaults and encourages documented compliance.
    Clause 470 creates an exception to specified penalty provisions: no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure. It functions as a non obstante provision covering enumerated sections, shifts the burden of proof to the taxpayer, and is aimed primarily at bona fide procedural or technical lapses rather than deliberate violations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Voluntary disclosure and penalty waiver enable administrative relief when pre detection disclosure, cooperation and payment conditions are met.
    Clause 469 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to reduce or waive penalties under section 439 where a taxpayer has made a full and true voluntary disclosure before detection, cooperated in assessment and paid or arranged payment of tax or interest; it includes a deeming rule for full disclosure, prior approval safeguards for high value cases, a bar on multiple reliefs, a genuine hardship route with recorded reasons, a twelve month disposal limit, opportunity to be heard, and finality of orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to quote TDCAN/TAN: discretionary fixed sanctions apply for non compliance and knowingly false quoting.
    Clause 468 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed monetary penalty for failure to comply with Section 397 and for quoting a false Tax Deduction and Collection Account Number in prescribed documents where the person knows or believes it to be false, making the penalty discretionary and imposing a mens rea requirement for false quoting while not expressly providing for a statutory opportunity of being heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    PAN/Aadhaar compliance: new per-default penalty regime distinguishes intentional false quoting from strict liability omissions and extends responsible person liability.
    Clause 467 establishes a per-default penalty regime for non-compliance with section 262, differentiating intentional false PAN/Aadhaar quoting-which requires proof of knowledge or belief-from omissions treated as strict liability, and extends liability to persons responsible for ensuring correct quoting/authentication; it emphasizes authentication and digital e KYC integration while remaining silent on express procedural safeguards such as the opportunity to be heard, creating potential due process and transitional issues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non cooperation: new provision allows senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty without explicit hearing safeguards.
    Clause 466 empowers specified senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty for failure to comply with section 254, mirroring prior penalty structure in authority and capped quantum but omitting express procedural safeguards such as an opportunity of being heard, defences like reasonable cause, and a requirement to record reasons, thereby raising concerns about procedural fairness and consistency in imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for procedural defaults: fixed and daily fines, capped to tax collectible, with delegated authority to impose them.
    Clause 465 creates a penalty regime for procedural non compliance under the Income Tax Bill, 2025: a fixed penalty for discrete defaults, a daily penalty for continuing defaults, a cap tying certain penalties to the amount of tax deductible or collectible, and specified authorities empowered to impose penalties; it broadens the definition of income tax authority and updates cross references to the restructured Bill, while notably omitting an explicit provision requiring an opportunity to be heard before penalty imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty regime for failure to furnish prescribed statements strengthens compliance under tax exempt reporting obligations.
    A statutory penalty regime targets failure by specified research institutions and charitable funds to furnish prescribed documents, statements, or certificates within prescribed timeframes; penalties fall within a prescribed band and are imposed at the discretion of the Assessing Officer, operating as a civil compliance measure alongside general procedural safeguards and requiring stakeholders to update compliance processes to align with re referenced substantive sections.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Professional accountability: penalty for furnishing incorrect information in professional reports or certificates under the new income tax bill.
    Clause 463 imposes a strict-liability penalty regime on accountants, merchant bankers and registered valuers for furnishing incorrect information in any report or certificate under the Act or rules. It prescribes a fixed per-instance monetary penalty and empowers the Assessing Officer, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals) to impose the penalty upon satisfaction that incorrect information was furnished. The clause updates definitional references for valuers, omits an explicit definition of "accountant," and operates without prejudice to other civil or criminal consequences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish information: fixed sanction for inaccurate or missing cross-border disclosure, raising proportionality concerns.
    Clause 462 penalises any person required to furnish information under section 397(3)(d) who fails to supply such information or furnishes inaccurate information; the Assessing Officer may impose a fixed monetary penalty, the provision mirrors Section 271I in structure and intent, lacks an express reasonable-cause defence or gradation of penalty, and raises interpretative issues as to the scope of "inaccurate information," procedural safeguards, and proportionality in enforcement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: discretionary fines with short grace period where tax is paid and statement filed promptly.
    Clause 461 creates a penalty for failure to deliver statements under section 397(3)(b) or for furnishing incorrect information, authorising the Assessing Officer to impose a discretionary monetary penalty equivalent in range to the existing Section 271H. Clause 461(2) exempts penalty where tax, fee and interest are paid to the Central Government and the statement is filed within a short grace period, thereby balancing deterrence with relief for prompt substantive compliance while leaving procedural safeguards and definitions, such as "incorrect information," unclearly specified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to submit statements may be imposed by the assessing officer as a daily or capped sanction, discretion preserved.
    Clause 460 permits the Assessing Officer to impose discretionary monetary penalties on any person required to furnish a statement under section 505 for failure to file within the prescribed period, using a two-tier structure of a daily sanction for short-term delay and a capped penalty for longer default, with applicability dependent on the scope of the parent reporting obligation and subject to the general procedural and appellate framework of the tax law.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reporting penalties: new clause preserves escalating daily fines and a large fixed penalty for inaccurate international tax reports.
    Clause 459 establishes a tiered penalty regime under section 511 for reporting entities: daily penalties for failure to furnish reports, daily penalties for failure to produce information after the allowed period, an escalated daily penalty if default continues after service of a penalty order, and a substantial fixed penalty for furnishing inaccurate information or failing to correct known or discovered inaccuracies. The prescribed authority under section 511 is empowered to impose these penalties, and the clause mirrors Section 271GB in quantum and triggers while raising issues about reasonable cause relief and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to report transfers of management or control triggers significant compliance and enforcement consequences.
    Clause 458 creates a penalty for failure by an Indian concern to furnish information or documents under section 506, authorising the prescribed income-tax authority to impose either a transaction-value-based penalty where a transaction effects a direct or indirect transfer of management or control, or a fixed monetary penalty otherwise, and otherwise mirrors the substantive framework and enforcement objectives of Section 271GA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation penalty: failure to furnish documents leads to transaction value based penalties and enforcement by tax authorities.
    Failure to furnish prescribed transfer pricing information or documentation for international or specified domestic transactions triggers a transaction value based penalty under Clause 457, enforceable by the Assessing Officer, authorised Transfer Pricing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals); the clause ties this enforcement directly to the obligations in section 171(2) and raises interpretive issues concerning the meaning of failure, computation of transaction value, overlap with other penalties, and the availability of a reasonable cause defence.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: eligible investment funds face a fixed sanction under the bill; authority may impose it.
    Clause 456 imposes a fixed penalty where an eligible investment fund fails to furnish required statements or information within the prescribed time; the prescribed income-tax authority may direct payment of the fixed sanction. The reporting deadline is set by the substantive eligibility reporting provision; the penalty is discretionary rather than automatic, lacks a graded scale, and does not expressly specify procedural safeguards such as criteria for discretion or an opportunity to be heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for inaccurate financial reporting imposes institutional and account-holder liability while enabling recovery of penalties from account holders.
    Clause 455 mandates penalties for persons required to furnish statements of financial transactions or reportable accounts for providing inaccurate information or failing to meet due diligence obligations, and imposes an additional per-account penalty on reporting financial institutions where inaccuracies stem from account-holder-supplied false information; reporting institutions may recover such additional penalties from the responsible account holders by direct recovery or retention of funds, with imposition directed by the prescribed income-tax authority and substantive continuity with the former Section 271FAA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish financial transaction statements - escalating daily sanctions for continued non-compliance after notice.
    Clause 454 creates a statutory penalty regime for failure to furnish a statement of financial transaction or reportable account, prescribing a daily penalty accruing from the date the filing deadline lapses, with an escalated daily rate where default continues after a formal notice, and vesting discretionary imposition authority in the income-tax authority subject to procedural safeguards and rights to challenge.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non-compliant loan repayments: Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to the amount repaid for procedural breaches.
    Clause 453 permits the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to any loan, deposit or specified advance repaid in contravention of section 188, applying to all persons and covering repayments made by non-transparent modes. The provision creates strict liability based on procedural breach rather than mens rea, centralizes enforcement with the Assessing Officer, and omits an explicit reasonable-cause defence, raising potential interpretative and transitional issues regarding the scope of specified advances and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic payment mandate triggers daily penalties for non compliance unless a taxpayer proves good and sufficient reason.
    Clause 452 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed per day monetary penalty for failure to provide prescribed electronic modes of payment under section 187, subject to a saving where the person proves good and sufficient reason for the failure; the provision mirrors the former section 271DB framework but streamlines authority and lacks detailed procedural guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary transaction penalty: discretion to impose a penalty equal to prohibited receipt unless good and sufficient reasons are proved.
    Clause 451 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received in contravention of section 186 unless the recipient proves good and sufficient reasons; the provision emphasises proportionality, vests discretion in enforcement, omits explicit procedural safeguards and mens rea, and mirrors the substantive penalty quantum and defence in the earlier statutory regime while differing in statutory tone and procedural concision.

    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

      Comparison of Section 2(29) "Company in which the public are substantially interested" between the Income‑Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income‑Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      19 August, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 2 Definitions.

      Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

      At a Glance

      Clause 2 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) contains definitions of key terms used throughout the Bill. It is foundational for classification and operation of the Bill-affecting taxpayers, tax authorities and regulated entities across industry-because definitional clarity determines applicability of obligations, rates and exemptions. Effective date or enactment timing: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks:Clause 2 is the definitions provision of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version). It sets out definitions for terms such as "assessee", "company", "capital asset", "income", "domestic company", "short-term capital asset", "virtual digital asset" and many others. The scope is the whole Bill: each defined term is used elsewhere in the Bill/Act and establishes the meaning to be applied unless the context otherwise requires. The text supplies detailed descriptions and sub-clauses for many terms; where a term lacks further explanation in Clause 2, the document does not provide such explanation (see below under specific headings).

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 2 provides a comprehensive glossary of terms and expressions. Coverage includes administrative office designations (e.g., "Assessing Officer", "Commissioner"), types of entities (e.g., "company", "domestic company", "foreign company", "public sector company"), income concepts (e.g., "income", "capital asset", "long-term capital gain", "short-term capital gain"), modes of transaction ("transfer", "slump sale", "demerger"), specialised items ("virtual digital asset", "zero coupon bond") and miscellaneous matters (e.g., "books of account", "fair market value"). Many definitions contain nested provisos, cross-references to other sections of the Bill or to other statutes (Companies Act, SEBI Act, RBI Act, etc.).

      Interpretation

      The definitions are expressed in ordinary statutory form: an opening saving ("unless the context otherwise requires"), followed by numbered sub-clauses. The Bill indicates that defined meanings apply throughout unless another meaning is clearly required by context. Interpretive cues placed in the text include cross-references to other sections and provisions of other statutes, and explicit provisos that exclude specified items from a definition (for example, exclusions from "capital asset"). The Bill does not expressly state legislative intent beyond the terms themselves; therefore, any broader purposive interpretation must be derived from the text and cross-references. Where the Bill departs from conventional drafting (see clause 2(29)(f) discussed earlier), interpretive uncertainty may arise and would need to be resolved by reference to plain meaning and legislative context.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Clause 2 contains numerous carve-outs and provisos. Examples include:

      • "capital asset" excludes stock-in-trade, personal effects and certain agricultural land, with a detailed table defining permissible distances from municipal limits.
      • "income" explicitly includes certain benefits, allowances and enumerated categories (e.g., assistance/subsidy), but excludes specific subsidy types under sub-clauses (w)(i) and (w)(ii).
      • "dividend" definition includes several inclusions and several listed exclusions (e.g., distributions on full cash shares, ordinary course loans by lenders, certain intergroup loans) together with contextual explanations of "accumulated profits".
      • "short-term capital asset" contains altered holding period rules for specified assets and a detailed scheme to compute holding periods in different factual scenarios.

      Where a particular exception or proviso is not present in the Bill text, the document states: Not stated in the document.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1 - Short-term vs Long-term: A security listed on a recognised Indian stock exchange held for 14 months will be a short-term capital asset because Clause 2(101)(b) substitutes "twelve months" for such securities. (This follows directly from the text.)
      • Example 2 - Agricultural land exclusion: A plot situated 7 kilometres from a municipal limit of a city with population 1,50,000 will fall within the "within distance" threshold in the table and therefore may not be excluded from "capital asset" as agricultural land. (Directly follows from Clause 2(22)(iii)(B) table.)
      • Example 3 - Virtual digital asset: A non-fungible token falls within the definition of "virtual digital asset" subject to any notification by the Central Government excluding specified digital assets. (Taken from Clause 2(111).)

      Interplay

      The definitions explicitly interact with other statutes and Bill provisions: references are made to the Companies Act, SEBI regulations, RBI Act, Special Economic Zones Act, Information Technology Act, and to schedules and other sections within the Bill (e.g., references to Schedule II, section numbers for assessment, Chapter XIX-C for advance tax). Where the Bill refers to rules, notifications or prescribed manner, those secondary instruments are necessary to give full effect to certain definitions (for instance, "fair market value" when market price cannot be ascertained is "determined in the manner, as prescribed"). The text does not specify those rules or their content: Not stated in the document.

      Differences between Section 2(29) - Act [As Passed] and Bill (Old Version)

      • Wording of condition clause: The Act (As Passed) uses the phrase "and either of the following conditions is fulfilled" (Document 1) while the Bill (Old Version) uses "and the following conditions are fulfilled" (Document 2).
        • Practical impact: The Bill's phrasing is grammatically susceptible to being read as requiring both listed conditions to be satisfied simultaneously rather than one or the other. This creates interpretive ambiguity on whether clause (f)(i) and (f)(ii) are alternative tests (as appears intended) or conjunctive tests. If read conjunctively, far fewer companies would qualify as a "company in which the public are substantially interested", with potential downstream effects on tax classification and benefits/exemptions tied to that status. The Act's later wording restores the clear disjunctive sense ("either ... is fulfilled"), reducing litigation risk on this point.
      • Minor drafting and punctuation differences: There are small differences in punctuation and phrasing (for example, the Bill refers to "the following conditions are fulfilled:-" and uses slightly different clause punctuation and spacing).
        • Practical impact: These are drafting-level variations with minimal substantive effect except insofar as punctuation/connector choice affects statutory interpretation (see preceding point).
      • Substantive content: No substantive alteration to the enumerated categories (clauses (a) to (f)) or the special proviso reducing the 50% test to 40% for certain Indian companies is visible between the two texts.
        • Practical impact: The categories of companies listed remain materially the same; the primary risk from the Bill language is interpretive (conjunctive vs disjunctive) rather than a change in policy scope.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers must pay careful attention to definitional nuances (e.g., holding periods for capital assets, the meaning of "dividend", and the thresholds in "company in which the public are substantially interested"). Ambiguities in drafting (notably the conjunctive/disjunctive phrasing risk in clause 2(29)(f) of the Bill) may give rise to disputes with the tax administration.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text implies the need to retain documentary evidence supporting factual classifications - e.g., shareholding records (to evidence percentage holdings throughout the tax year), listing status at year-end, valuation documents for fair market value, records of asset holding periods and conversion dates, and documentation supporting the characterisation of benefits/subsidies. Where the document requires prescribed procedures for valuation or conditions, those procedures themselves are Not stated in the document.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 2 is foundational: definitions determine the operation and reach of the Bill across taxpayers and administration.
      • The Bill contains detailed, often technical definitions with multiple cross-references and provisos that materially affect tax treatment.
      • Certain definitions require secondary rules or notifications ("prescribed" manner) which are not provided in the document: Not stated in the document.
      • Drafting differences between the Bill and the Act (As Passed) are largely textual, but can create interpretive risk (notably in clause 2(29)(f)).
      • Taxpayers and advisers should focus on documentation of shareholding, asset conversion/allotment dates, and classification evidence to minimise disputes.

      Full Text:

      Section 2 Definitions.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax