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
    Distinction between Capital Gains and Business Income: Comprehensive Analysis of a Income Tax Case
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Multifaceted Legal Analysis on Transfer Pricing and Tonnage Tax Scheme, Bareboat Charter, Interest...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessment of Eligibility for Tax Deductions Under Scrutiny: Tribunal Upholds PCIT's Revisionary Pow...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Insight into Penalties for Procedural Lapses in Customs Documentation
    Legalities of Input Tax Credit Refunds (IGST), period of limitation and COVID-19 pandemic: A Case St...
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Reversal of CENVAT Credit: A Critical Analysis of a Recent Legal Dispute
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxation of Employee Benefits: TDS on value of accommodation provided to the employees at the rate o...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Intricacies of Unexplained Investment and Legal Recourse: A Comprehensive Analysis of a recent C...
    Navigating Legal Intricacies: Power to arrest under PMLA and compliance with CrPC
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Intricacies of Taxation on Interconnect Charges in Telecom: Unraveling the Concept of 'Use or Right ...
    Case LawsVAT / Sales Tax
    The Priority of Secured Creditors in Financial Recoveries: A Comprehensive Analysis of Central Bank ...
    Navigating the Intricacies of Seizure and Confiscation under the GST Regime: A Detailed Analysis of ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Principle of Mutuality in Taxation: A Comprehensive Analysis of a Landmark Supreme Court Decisio...
    Case LawsService Tax
    Legal Nuances in CENVAT Credit Rules and Extended Limitation Periods: A Detailed Analysis
    Case LawsService Tax
    Cenvat Credit - Input Service Distributors and the Extended Period of Limitation in Service Tax Law:...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Complexities of Gold Importation - Prohibited Goods and Redemption: An Analysis of the 2023 (8) TMI...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    A Case Study on Condonation of Delay in filing the Appeal in Indian Legal System
    Restrictions on availing Input Tax Credit (ITC) - constitutional validity of Section 16(4): A Landma...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Landmark Income Tax Reassessment Case
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Legal Dissection of Best Judgment Assessments in Tax Law, in the context of Sections 153A/153C in ...
❯❯
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
    Classification of property income: conversion into business income denies capital-gains relief and alters deduction eligibility.
    Where land initially held as a capital asset is developed and sold through partnership activity with a profit motive, the asset can be characterized as having undergone conversion into stock-in-trade and treated as business income; that characterization determines tax consequences by excluding capital-gains-specific deductions and reinvestment reliefs, and depends on the taxpayer's intention and the transactional pattern.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing applicability to tonnage tax scheme narrowed; tonnage-covered operations exempted from transfer pricing obligations.
    Transfer pricing provisions were held inapplicable to operations covered by the Tonnage Tax Scheme, and transfer pricing adjustments based on differential interest for a bareboat charter cum demise lease were rejected in light of prior consistent rulings. The Tribunal treated the relevant interest income and expenditure as business income, examined whether a negative lien equated to a fee-bearing corporate guarantee, and reviewed allocation principles for common interest and hire-charge adjustments between tonnage and non-tonnage activities.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisionary power under section 263 upholds reassessment where deduction eligibility under section 80IB(11A) is lacking.
    The PCIT found the assessee ineligible for the deduction under section 80IB because operations commenced outside the period in section 80IB(11A); the original assessment accepted the deduction without examining this eligibility. The PCIT issued a show-cause and, treating the original order as erroneous and prejudicial to revenue, exercised revisionary power under section 263 to quash the order and direct reassessment, the Tribunal upholding that revision was appropriate where the error was beyond mere rectification remedies.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Proportionality in customs penalties: enhanced fines require adequate justification and consideration of compliance efforts by authorities.
    The legal issue concerns penalties under the provisional duty assessment regulations for delayed document submission; adjudicators must assess the limited nature of procedural lapses, consider compliance efforts where documents are produced during show cause proceedings, and apply proportionality principles. Enhanced penalties require adequate, reasoned justification, and adjudicators should determine whether a nominal penalty already imposed is commensurate with the lapse and its impact on finalizing provisional assessment and duty realization.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation exclusion for pandemic renders delayed ITC refund claims timely under CGST limitation provision, court applies notification.
    The court held that the pandemic period exclusion notification applies to computation of the limitation for refunds of unutilised Input Tax Credit arising from exports under a letter of undertaking. After assessing eligibility issues and time barred components of the ITC claim, the court found the appellate conclusion of limitation unsustainable and quashed the impugned order, applying the notification to the refund computation.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Show AI Summary
    CENVAT credit reversal: elective accounting options cannot be imposed on a taxpayer, limiting percentage-based recovery.
    Dispute concerns entitlement to reverse CENVAT credit when a manufacturer produces both dutiable and exempt goods without separate records. Rule 6(3) provides elective options for taxpayers not maintaining segregated accounts but authorities cannot impose those options on the assessee. Rule 14 and statutory recovery provisions allow recovery of wrongly availed credit, yet there is no statutory basis to mandate recovery by applying fixed percentages to the value of exempted goods; if the assessee has already reversed credit attributable to exempted production, additional percentage-based demands or penalties lack legal support.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Perquisite valuation: absence of employer concession leads to no TDS on rent-free employee accommodation under valuation rules.
    The tribunal concluded that perquisite taxation on rent-free accommodation requires a demonstrable concession by the employer; in the absence of such concession the perquisite value is nil. Although the institution is not a Central Government entity, the Revenue's invocation of Rule 3 and fixed percentage valuation was premature. The appellate deletion of the withholding demand was affirmed on the ground that no concession existed and therefore no taxable perquisite arose.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Unexplained investments deemed taxable where cancellation deeds lack civil adjudication and source credibility is unproven.
    The tribunal sustained income tax additions under the unexplained investment provision, holding that the assessee failed to prove the creditworthiness and reality of alleged fund sources for a land purchase revealed in a survey, and that registered cancellation deeds without a civil court decree do not legally negate the original transaction for tax purposes.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Show AI Summary
    Power to arrest under PMLA requires recorded reasons and limits general arrest notice requirements, affecting remand review.
    Power to arrest under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act requires strict recording and communication of reasons for arrest and operates through a specialized, self-contained mechanism limiting the applicability of certain general arrest notices. Judicial remand and CrPC procedures apply only to the extent they do not conflict with the PMLA; habeas corpus is available for illegal detention but is not ordinarily to be used to routinely challenge reasoned, statutorily compliant remand orders.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use or right to use: interconnect charges not treated as royalty under treaty because no transfer of use of IP.
    The core question was whether interconnect usage charges fall within royalty by virtue of conferring the use or right to use a process or equipment. The tribunal held that IUC did not amount to royalty because the telecommunications processes were standard industry practice, not proprietary or secret, and therefore did not grant a transferable right to exploit intellectual property; treaty interpretation under the DTAA controlled characterization.
    Case LawsVAT / Sales Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Priority of secured creditors affirmed over state tax claims under SARFAESI Act, reinforcing security interest protection in recoveries.
    The court's analysis centers on the statutory priority conferred by the SARFAESI framework for enforcement of security interests, treating secured creditors' lien-based rights as superior to government tax claims on the same charged asset and narrowing the traditional Crown Debt preference where the statutory enforcement regime specifies priorities.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Seizure powers under GST limited to goods and material useful to proceedings, excluding currency and requiring necessity.
    The power to inspect, search and seize under Section 67 is confined to items believed to be liable for confiscation or material useful to proceedings; the statutory definition excludes money from 'goods', seizure must be necessary for GST proceedings, and items not relied upon in subsequent notice are to be returned within a limited period, reflecting a narrower interpretation of 'things' consistent with legislative intent.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Principle of mutuality: interest on clubs' bank deposits treated as commercial income and not mutuality-exempt.
    The Court analysed whether investing clubs' surplus funds in bank fixed deposits preserved the identity between contributors and beneficiaries required by the Principle of Mutuality. It found that such investments diverted funds into commercial dealings with third parties and were not applied directly for members' mutual services, thereby breaking mutuality. As a result, interest earned on those investments did not qualify as exempt mutual receipts and was treated as taxable income.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation period: requires proof of fraud or wilful suppression; mere self-assessment errors are insufficient.
    The tribunal held that invocation of the extended period of limitation for recovery of irregularly availed CENVAT credit requires affirmative grounds such as fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, or suppression of facts; mere incorrect self-assessment, audit disagreement, or discovery during audit does not establish the necessary intent to evade, and therefore demands beyond the normal limitation period (except conceded amounts) could not be sustained.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Cenvat credit validity vs procedural lapses: extended limitation requires evidence of fraud or suppression to apply.
    Whether a PSU could claim CENVAT credit through its Head Office functioning as an Input Service Distributor despite documentation lapses, and whether the Department could invoke the extended period of limitation were examined. The focus is on reconciling substantive receipt of services with procedural compliance, and on the requisite showing of fraud, collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts to justify extending limitation beyond the normal period; mere delay without such evidence does not suffice.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Gold importation without declaration: whether undeclared imports amount to smuggling and bar redemption under customs law.
    The petitions question whether undeclared gold imports that bypass the Green Channel constitute prohibited goods or smuggling under the Customs Act, 1962, and whether adjudicating authorities properly exercised discretion under Section 125 in confiscating goods and denying redemption, given alleged arbitrariness and inconsistent treatment.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Delay condonation in land acquisition appeals hinges on whether administrative impediments amount to sufficient cause.
    Delay condonation in land acquisition appeals hinges on whether administrative or bureaucratic impediments amount to a sufficient cause rather than an excuse; courts must assess explanations case-by-case, balancing procedural discipline against substantive justice while guarding against routine tolerance of government inefficiency.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit time-bar upheld: legislative limits on ITC claims are valid, treating ITC as a conditional concession.
    The time-limit for claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) was upheld as a permissible legislative condition: ITC is a concession contingent on statutory requirements, temporal restrictions fall within legislative competence, and business forms like proprietorships cannot invoke trade-right protections in the same manner as citizens; judicial interference in fiscal policy is limited where statutory mechanisms govern tax benefits.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment notice limitations restrict tax authorities when issued beyond limitation or without mandated approval or procedural defects.
    A reassessment issued after the three year limitation period and without approval from the specified authority fails statutory prerequisites and cannot sustain reassessment. Reassessment powers are limited to non disclosure or material misstatement of facts in the original assessment and do not extend to changes of opinion. TOLA 2020 does not expand substantive reassessment powers or alter approval requirements, and correct classification of expenses as capital or revenue remains central to tax consequence determinations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Best judgment assessment standards tightened when linked to search-and-seizure reassessments requiring documented satisfaction and DIN compliance.
    Best judgment assessment under Section 144 is examined alongside Sections 153A and 153C, stressing that invocation of Section 144 must be grounded in the legitimate scope opened by search-related reassessments. The court emphasises that the Assessing Officer's satisfaction note must be substantively supported, administrative formalities such as a Document Identification Number must be complied with, and that extensions of assessment periods require concrete evidentiary justification.

    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 4 “BASIS OF CHARGE” 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 4 Charge of income-tax.

      Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

      At a Glance

      Document: Clause 4 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) - provision establishing the charge of income-tax. It sets out the basis on which income-tax is to be charged, the taxable base (total income of the tax year), inclusion of additional income-tax, treatment of non-tax-year periods, and obligations for deduction/collection/advance payment. It affects all taxpayers and the tax administration. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause 4 is located in Chapter II ("Basis of Charge") of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version). It articulates the foundational charge rule that links the rate-setting function (a Central Act enacting rates for a tax year) with the charging mechanism under this Bill. Definitions beyond the text of Clause 4 (for example, definitions of "tax year", "person", or procedural provisions) are not contained within Clause 4 and therefore: Not stated in the document.

      Clause 4 explicitly covers: (i) the triggering of rates enacted by a Central Act; (ii) that charge is on total income of the tax year of every person; (iii) that "income-tax" includes any additional income-tax, by whatever name called; (iv) charging in respect of income of periods other than the tax year where the Act so provides; and (v) obligations for deduction/collection at source or advance payment in respect of chargeable income.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 4 sets out the charge of income-tax in five sub-clauses:

      • Sub-clause (1): Income-tax for any tax year shall be charged according to the Act at rates enacted by a Central Act for that tax year. The provision links rate determination (a Central Act) with charging under this Bill.

      • Sub-clause (2): The charge under sub-clause (1) is on the total income of the tax year of every person as per this Act.

      • Sub-clause (3): Income-tax also includes any additional income-tax, by whatever name called, levied under this Act.

      • Sub-clause (4): If the Act provides charge in respect of income of a period other than the tax year, income-tax shall be charged accordingly.

      • Sub-clause (5): For the income chargeable under sub-clause (2), income-tax shall be deducted or collected at source or paid in advance as provided under this Act.

      Coverage: persons liable to tax (term "every person" used) and the mechanism by which the charge applies. The provision is foundational; operational details (rates, computation rules, exemptions, assessments, appeals, procedural mechanisms) are outside Clause 4 and: Not stated in the document.

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent and interpretive signals present in the text include:

      • A linkage between rate-setting (Central Act) and the charging operation under the Bill - the Bill does not itself set rates for tax years but gives effect to rates enacted by Central Act.

      • Taxable base is expressed in aggregate language ("total income of the tax year of every person"), indicating a comprehensive annual basis of charge rather than, for example, a transactional levy.

      • Inclusion of "additional income-tax" by whatever name called appears designed to encompass levy labels and avoid form-based avoidance.

      • Provision for periods other than tax year signals legislative flexibility to allow charging on other accounting or specified periods where the Act so provides.

      Beyond these textual cues, legislative purpose, policy rationales, and explanatory memorandum content: Not stated in the document.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Clause 4 contains no explicit provisos or exceptions. It does not specify exclusions, thresholds, or special categories (e.g., non-residents, charitable institutions). Those matters are addressed elsewhere in the Bill or other laws: Not stated in the document.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A resident individual's total income for tax year 2025-26 is computed under the Act. The Central Act enacts rates for 2025-26; income-tax is charged on that total income at those rates and is subject to deduction at source or advance payment as prescribed.

      • Example 2: The Act provides for charging tax on a specified accounting period (e.g., a fiscal quarter) for certain entities. Under sub-clause (4), where the Act so provides, income-tax shall be charged in respect of that period rather than the tax year.

      Interplay

      Clause 4 cross-references to rate-setting by a Central Act and anticipates other provisions of the Bill dealing with computation, withholding, and advance payment. However, specific Rules/Notifications/Circulars or other sections that modify or implement Clause 4 are not cited in the text: Not stated in the document. The provision establishes a high-level interaction between (a) the Central Act that enacts rates and (b) the Bill that sets charge mechanics; further operational interplay is governed by other provisions external to Clause 4.

      Differences Between Section 4 (Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]) and Clause 4 (Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version) and Practical Impact

      • Wording and grammatical re-ordering in sub-section (1):

        Old Bill: "Income-tax for any tax year shall be charged as per the provisions of this Act at the rate or rates which are enacted by a Central Act for such tax year."

        Passed Act: "Where any Central Act enacts that income-tax shall be charged for any tax year at any rate or rates, income-tax for such tax year shall be charged at that rate or those rates in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this Act."

        Practical impact: Purely stylistic/clarificatory. The Passed Act places primacy on the Central Act's enactment as the triggering event and clarifies that the charge must be in accordance with this Act. No substantive change to the legal effect is apparent.

      • Difference in cross-reference in sub-section (5):

        Old Bill: "For the income chargeable under sub-section (2), income-tax shall be deducted or collected at source or paid in advance as provided under this Act."

        Passed Act: "For the income chargeable under this section, income-tax shall be deducted or collected at source or paid in advance as provided under this Act."

        Practical impact: The Passed Act broadens the cross-reference from "sub-section (2)" (which refers to charge on total income of the tax year) to "this section" (which includes charging on other periods under subsection (4) as well). This is a minor but potentially meaningful drafting clarification: withholding/deduction/advance payment obligations are linked to all income chargeable u/s 4 (including income of periods other than the tax year), avoiding any unintended limitation to only tax-year charges. Functionally, it clarifies the scope of withholding/advance payment obligations, potentially preventing interpretive disputes.

      • Other differences:

        The two texts are otherwise substantially the same: both (a) impose a charge of income-tax at rates enacted by Central Act; (b) state charge is on total income of the tax year of every person; (c) include "income-tax" to encompass additional income-tax by whatever name called; and (d) provide charging for periods other than tax year where provided.

        Practical impact: No substantive change in core charging mechanism. Changes are drafting clarifications that may aid interpretation and application but do not introduce new concepts or taxpayer obligations beyond existing structure.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Clause 4 confirms that income-tax liability arises on the computation of total income for the tax year, and that withholding/collection/advance payment duties attach to chargeable income. Practical compliance therefore depends on the correct identification of the tax year, accurate computation of "total income" (as defined elsewhere), and adherence to withholding and advance payment schedules specified in other provisions.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points: Although Clause 4 does not prescribe documentation, its emphasis on deduction/collection and advance payment implies taxpayers and withholding agents should maintain records supporting computation of total income, bases for withholding, dates and amounts of advance payments, and any alternative period-based computations if the Act permits charging for non-tax-year periods. Specific documentary requirements: Not stated in the document.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 4 establishes the foundational charge of income-tax tied to rates enacted by a Central Act.
      • The taxable base is the "total income of the tax year of every person" unless the Act provides otherwise.
      • "Income-tax" is defined inclusively to cover any additional income-tax regardless of name.
      • The Clause permits charging on periods other than the tax year where expressly provided by the Act.
      • Withholding, collection at source and advance payment obligations apply to income chargeable under the Clause (specific procedures are provided elsewhere).
      • The Old Bill's language is substantively similar to the Passed Act; the key drafting difference concerns the cross-reference in the withholding/advance-payment sub-clause.
      • Operational details, definitions, effective date, and legislative history are not contained in Clause 4: Not stated in the document.

      Full Text:

      Section 4 Charge of income-tax.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax