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
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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 17 "Perquisite" 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 17 Perquisite.

      Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

      At a Glance

      Clause 17 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) defines "perquisite" for the Part dealing with salaries. It lists categories of benefits treated as perquisites, items excluded from that definition, and furnishes definitions relevant to valuation. The provision matters to employers, employees, and tax authorities because it determines when non-cash and certain employer-paid benefits are taxable as part of salary. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause 17 forms part of the Bill's Part on Salaries and establishes the meaning of "perquisite" for the purposes of taxation under the head Salaries. The clause enumerates inclusions (sub-section (1)), exclusions (sub-section (2)), a limited special rule (sub-section (3)), and definitions (sub-section (4)). The text provides limited definitional guidance for key terms such as "fair market value," "family" (by reference to Schedule III Note 2), "gross total income" (by reference to section 122(10)), "hospital," "option," "specified security," and "sweat equity shares." Methods of computation and several operational aspects are left to be prescribed or specified by subordinate rules.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 17(1) lists specific items that shall be treated as perquisites: rent-free accommodation and concessional accommodation where value exceeds rent recoverable or payable (clauses (a) and (b)); benefits or amenities granted free or at concessional rates in two sub-categories (clause (c)); specified securities or sweat equity shares allotted/transferred free or at concessional rates (clause (d)); "any other benefit or amenity" as prescribed (clause (e)); sums paid by the employer in respect of obligations which would otherwise be payable by the assessee (clause (f)); employer-paid life assurance or annuity premiums except contributions to recognised provident funds, approved superannuation funds, or specified deposit-linked insurance funds (clause (g)); employer contributions in excess of Rs. 750,000 in a tax year to a recognised provident fund/scheme in section 124(1)/approved superannuation fund (clause (h)); and annual accretion (interest, dividend or similar) to the balance of those funds to the extent relating to the excess contribution (clause (i)).

      Clause 17(2) lists exclusions from the perquisite definition-medical treatment in employer-maintained hospitals; employer payments of employee-incurred medical expenses in specified government/local authority/approved hospitals or for prescribed diseases in hospitals approved by Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner having regard to guidelines; portions of employer-paid health insurance premiums under schemes approved for section 30(c); employer payments of employee-paid health insurance premiums under schemes approved for section 126; employer expenditure on use of a vehicle for commute between residence and office; employer expenditure on medical treatment abroad, travel and stay abroad for treatment, and travel and stay of one attendant-subject to conditions in subsection (3).

      Clause 17(3) conditions the exclusions in sub-clause (2)(f): medical treatment and stay abroad excluded only to the extent permitted by the Reserve Bank of India; travel exclusion applies only in relation to employees whose gross total income (computed before including the expenditure) does not exceed an amount as prescribed.

      Interpretation

      The Bill adopts a largely enumerative approach: a wide variety of employer-provided benefits are captured expressly as perquisites, many of which leave valuation methods to be prescribed. The presence of specific carve-outs for certain employer expenditures (notably employer-provided medical treatment and certain insurance premiums) indicates legislative intent to exclude from perquisite treatment certain welfare-type expenditures or employer arrangements approved under specified statutory schemes. The cross-references to sections 30(c), 122(10), and 124(1), and to Schedule III reflect an intent to integrate perquisite treatment with existing constructs in the tax code. The Bill repeatedly delegates valuation methodology and thresholds to subordinate rules ("as prescribed"/"as specified"), indicating reliance on delegated legislation for operationalisation.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      The key exceptions are in sub-section (2): multiple categories of medical treatment and approved insurance arrangements are excluded; commuting vehicle expenditure is excluded; and specific foreign medical treatment/travel exclusions are carved out subject to the conditions in sub-section (3). There are no express provisos for timing, retrospective application, or grandfathering in the text. Thresholds for exclusion tied to gross total income are delegated to prescription.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: An employer provides rent-free accommodation to an employee. That accommodation's value must be computed as a perquisite under clause (a) in the manner prescribed. (Valuation method: Not stated in the document.)

      • Example 2: A company allots sweat equity shares to an employee at a discount. Clause (d) treats the fair market value on exercise date less amounts paid/recovered from the employee as a perquisite. (Computation specifics: Not stated in the document.)

      • Example 3: An employer pays an employee's hospital bill incurred at a government hospital. Clause (2)(b)(i) excludes such a payment from perquisite. (Limits or documentation required: Not stated in the document.)

      Interplay

      Clause 17 cross-references other statutory provisions-section 122(10) for gross total income, section 124(1) for certain provident fund schemes, and section 30(c) and section 126 for approved insurance schemes. The Bill contemplates subordinate rules to prescribe valuation methodology and thresholds; the precise interaction with existing rules/notifications is therefore dependent on those future prescriptions. The text does not state interplay with income-tax rules currently in force or transitional treatment for existing arrangements. Not stated in the document: detailed procedural interaction with Forms, reporting obligations, or timing of inclusion in income.

      Differences Between Section 17 (Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]) and Clause 17 (Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version)

      • Clarification on scope of clause (c)(ii): The enacted Section 17 inserts the bracketed qualification "[other than employee referred in sub-clause (i)]" into clause (c)(ii), whereas the Bill version lacks that exclusion. Practical impact: removes potential overlap by ensuring that company directors or those with substantial interest (covered by clause (c)(i)) are not also captured under clause (c)(ii)'s income-threshold-based catch-all. This reduces risk of double-counting and narrows the population subject to clause (c)(ii).
      • Prescriptive language differences: The Act generally uses "as may be prescribed" in several places (e.g., computation of rent-free accommodation, fair market value), whereas the Bill often used "as prescribed" or "as specified." Practical impact: "as may be prescribed" signals explicit delegated-legislation power and may be read as emphasising reliance on future rules; "as prescribed" in the Bill conveyed a similar idea but the shift may be stylistic and reinforces the expectation of rules to prescribe methods.
      • Guidance/approval language in medical approvals: Sub-section (2)(b)(ii) in the Bill referred to hospitals approved "having regard to such guidelines as specified"; the Act refers to approval "having regard to such guidelines as may be issued in this behalf." Practical impact: the Act expressly contemplates guidelines to be issued (i.e., an enabling formulation), thereby clarifying the administrative mechanism for approvals and potentially expanding administrative discretion to issue guidelines.
      • Minor drafting and punctuation differences: Several minor differences exist (e.g., phrasing around "computed in such manner, as prescribed" vs "computed in such manner as may be prescribed"; numeric representation "seven lakh and fifty thousand rupees" vs "Rs. 750000"). Practical impact: largely stylistic; numeric representation in the Act may be clearer for readers of consolidated statute.
      • Definitions and examples (stylistic): The definition of "specified security" in the Act includes a slightly different connective phrase regarding employee stock option plans ("therefor" vs omission). Practical impact: no substantive change in meaning apparent from the texts provided; primarily drafting refinement.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas grounded in text: Employers must identify and value a broad set of benefits as perquisites, subject to prescribed methods; failure to apply the prescribed valuation (when framed) risks misclassification. Particular focus should be on accommodation benefits, securities/sweat equity allocations, and aggregate employer contributions to retirement funds exceeding Rs. 750,000.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text implies need to maintain records supporting valuation and the amounts recovered from employees for securities/shares (clause (4)(h)); records evidencing hospital maintenance/approval, approvals for insurance schemes, and the quantum and nature of employer-paid medical or travel expenses will be relevant. Exact documentary requirements: Not stated in the document.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 17 provides an inclusive list of benefits to be treated as perquisites for salary taxation, capturing accommodation, securities/shares, employer-paid obligations, insurance premiums, and excess retirement contributions.
      • Several exclusions are provided, particularly for employer-provided medical treatment and certain approved insurance schemes; exclusions for foreign medical treatment/travel are conditional.
      • Valuation methods and some operational thresholds are delegated to subordinate prescription or specification; the Bill itself does not provide computational details.
      • Cross-references to existing statutory provisions indicate integration with recognised provident fund and insurance approval frameworks, but detailed interplay awaits rules/notifications.
      • Employers and employees should expect future rules to specify valuation methods, prescribed thresholds, and potentially documentary/compliance processes; the Bill leaves significant operational detail to be prescribed.

      Full Text:

      Section 17 Perquisite.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax