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
    NewsBill
    AMENDMENT TO SEVENTH SCHEDULE TO THE FINANCE ACT, 2001
    NewsBill
    EXEMPTION FROM CENTRAL EXCISE DUTY ON VALUE OF BIOGAS/COMPRESSED BIOGAS (CBG) CONTAINED IN BLENDED C...
    NewsBill
    DEFERMENT OF DATE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF HIGHER EXCISE DUTY ON SALE OF UNBLENDED DIESEL
    NewsBill
    AMENDMENTS IN THE CGST ACT, 2017
    NewsBill
    AMENDMENTS IN THE IGST ACT, 2017
    Intermediary Services Under Section 2(13) of the IGST Act and Export of Services Under Section 2(6):...
    Distinction Between Setting Aside an Illegal Bail Order and Cancellation of Bail: Revisional Scrutin...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 153C (Finance Act, 2015) and Third-Party Search Assessments: Interplay of Belongs To and Per...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Effect of Section 92CA(1) Reference on Assessment Limitation: Application of Section 153(4) in Trans...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Digital Material Recovered in Search under Section 132 and Its Nexus with the Non-Searched Person: C...
    Refund Disputes Linked to Rule 96(10) and Rule 89(4B): Consequences of Omission of Rules Without Exp...
    Service Mechanisms (for Notices and SCN) in GST: Deemed Service, Portal Availability, and Statutory ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Due Compliance with Section 138C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 for Admissibility of Electronic Records...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Sequential Application of the General Rules for Interpretation in Customs Tariff Classification unde...
    Section 74 CGST Proceedings and the Impermissibility of Clubbing Multiple Financial Years in a Singl...
    Composite Show Cause Notices Under Section 74 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the Requirement of Tax-Perio...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Reverse Burden, Ownership Attribution, and Proof in Gold Seizure Cases: Reaffirming Procedural Safeg...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 68, Loan Credits, and the Limits of Suspicion: Evidentiary Discipline in Search-Linked Asses...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    JAO vs. FAO: Reassessment in the Faceless Era: The Continuing Validity of JAO Jurisdiction Pending S...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour, Tax Compliance, and Judicial Reform: Legally Enforceable Debt and Procedural Innov...
❯❯
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
    NewsBill
    Show AI Summary
    Chewing and related tobacco NCCD schedule rates raised to 60% from May 1, 2026, while effective rate stays 25%.
    Seventh Schedule to the Finance Act, 2001 is amended to raise NCCD rates from 25% to 60% for HS 2403 99 10 (chewing tobacco), HS 2403 99 30 (jarda scented tobacco) and HS 2403 99 90 (other tobacco products including gutkha) effective 01.05.2026, while a notification will maintain the applied effective rate at 25%.
    NewsBill
    Show AI Summary
    Biogas/CBG in blended CNG: value and related taxes excluded from transaction value for central excise from 02.02.2026.
    The value of Biogas/Compressed Biogas (CBG) contained in blended CNG, and the central, state, union territory or integrated taxes paid on that Biogas/CBG, are excluded from the transaction value for computing central excise duty on blended CNG; the exclusion is effected by amending the existing notification framework and takes effect from 02.02.2026, with the prior GST-only relief rescinded.
    NewsBill
    Show AI Summary
    Unblended diesel additional excise duty implementation deferred until 31.03.2028 by amendment to existing notification effective immediately.
    The additional excise duty of Rs.2 per litre on unblended diesel is deferred until 31.03.2028 by amendment of Notification No. 11/2017 Central Excise through Notification No. 02/2026 Central Excise (01.02.2026), thereby postponing the levy of the higher duty on unblended diesel.
    NewsBill
    Show AI Summary
    Goods and Services Tax: amendments remove discount-agreement link, expand refund scope, and allow interim appellate authorities.
    Amendments remove the requirement that a post-sale discount be linked to an agreement and prescribe issuance of a credit note under section 34 when input tax credit is reversed; section 34 is amended to reference section 15. Section 54 is amended to extend provisional refunds to inverted duty structure claims and to remove the sanction threshold for refunds on exported goods with tax paid. Section 101A gains sub-section (1A) allowing the Central Government to notify an existing authority or tribunal to hear appeals under section 101B pending the National Appellate Authority, with sub-sections (2)-(13) not applying where such empowerment occurs, effective 01.04.2026.
    NewsBill
    Show AI Summary
    Place of supply for intermediary services will follow the IGST Act default provision after omission of the specific clause.
    The amendment omits clause (b) of sub section (8) of section 13 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 so that the place of supply for intermediary services will be determined by the default provision in section 13(2) of the IGST Act, aligning intermediary services with the Act's general place of supply framework.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Education consultancy commissions treated as exportable services, not intermediary services, where foreign institution is the contracting recipient.
    The Court held that the intermediary test focuses on whether a person merely "arranges or facilitates" a supply, excluding those who supply on their own account; where agreements and consideration establish a principal-to-principal supply to foreign educational institutions, the services qualify as export of services and not intermediary services, making place of supply the recipient's location and supporting refund entitlement.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST arrests: Court set aside bail premised on format defects where substantive compliance and no demonstrable prejudice existed.
    The High Court held that a challenge to the legal sustainability of a bail order is distinct from cancellation for supervening conduct and, on the facts, found substantive compliance with CGST arrest safeguards (including authorisation recording reasons to believe and supply of arrest memo and grounds) and BNSS Sections 47-48 when assessed through a prejudice oriented test; absence of statutory headings or non enclosure of detailed grounds with the relative did not, without demonstrable prejudice, justify the magistrate's bail order, which was set aside and the bail bonds cancelled with liberty to apply afresh.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 153C: amended trigger applies if seized material is received post amendment, widening third party assessment scope.
    The substituted text widens the jurisdictional trigger for third party assessments from strict ownership to where books or documents "pertain to" or contain information that "relates to" the other person; the first proviso's deeming fiction makes the date of receipt of seized material by the other person's Assessing Officer the operative reference point, so if receipt, satisfaction and issuance of notice occur after the amendment, the amended provision governs, subject to the requirement of recorded satisfaction that the material bears on determination of total income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing assessments: outer statutory limitation governs final orders; DRP deadlines do not enlarge the overall limitation.
    The tribunal permitted admission of additional legal grounds based on facts on record and held that the outer statutory limitation governs final assessments in eligible-assessee transfer pricing cases. The dispute-resolution procedural deadline requires prompt action after directions but does not enlarge the overall limitation; statutory extension available for transfer pricing references is to be applied to the outer limit, and external judicial limitation extensions do not extend the time for completing original assessments.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Digital material recovered in a third party search cannot alone justify invoking Section 153C without a direct nexus to the non searched person.
    Section 153C jurisdiction requires seized or requisitioned books of account or documents from a search that relate to or pertain to a non searched person; digital images recovered in a third party search that did not name or connect the petitioners could not sustain Section 153C. The Assessing Officer's reliance on post search forms, voluntary supply of documents, public domain inquiries, and an inferential consideration mismatch rendered the recorded satisfaction de hors the statutory trigger, allowing writ relief for jurisdictional defect.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST refund and recovery proceedings founded solely on omitted rules lapse absent express saving clause.
    Omission of Rule 89(4B) and Rule 96(10) without an express saving clause causes pending proceedings and non-final orders founded solely on those rules to lapse, except for transactions past and closed. The General Clauses Act's preservation principle does not apply to omissions effected by subordinate rules/notification, and transitional or laying provisions of the parent statute do not operate as omnibus saving clauses. Consequently, undisposed show cause notices and orders dependent only on the omitted rules were quashed and affected refund applications were remitted for reconsideration after hearing within a stipulated period.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST electronic service by portal or email may not trigger appeal limitation absent verifiable communication or retrieval evidence.
    Whether portal upload or e-mail intimation automatically triggers the limitation period under Section 107 depends on whether such electronic modes fall within the statutory deeming fictions of Section 169(2) or Section 169(3). Although Section 169(1)(c)-(d) and Rule 142 permit electronic service, the express deeming consequences are confined to specified modes; absent acknowledgement or verifiable retrieval logs, IT Act presumptions of dispatch/receipt do not alone establish communication for appeal limitation.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic evidence admissibility in customs proceedings: contemporaneous extraction records and Section 108 statements can satisfy the certificate requirement.
    The Court held that contemporaneous extraction/printing records, device particulars, and un-retracted Section 108 statements acknowledging computer printouts can constitute substantive due compliance with Section 138C(4) of the Customs Act, 1962; a certificate not in prescribed format will not automatically invalidate admissibility where authenticity is not disputed, while other statutory evidentiary issues (including Section 138B) remain open for adjudication.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Aluminium shelving classed by import condition: use allowed only if statutorily permitted; supports aren't parts at import.
    Classification requires sequentially applying GRI 1 with relevant Section and Chapter Notes; aligned HSN Explanatory Notes guide interpretation. Use is relevant only where permitted and must reflect intended use objectively evident at importation per the as imported principle. A "part" must have an essential functional nexus to machine operation; mere supporting platforms or shelves that do not contribute mechanically to operation are not parts and may instead fall under material-based structure headings.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composite GST show cause notices spanning multiple financial years misalign tax-period limitation and may be quashed.
    Issuance of a single consolidated show cause notice covering distinct financial years was held impermissible because GST liability is tethered to tax-period returns and limitation timelines; consolidation misaligns period-specific adjudication clocks, constitutes a jurisdictional defect, and warrants quashing with liberty to re-issue notices in strict conformity with the period-wise statutory scheme.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Composite GST show cause notices aggregating multiple financial years lack scope; demands must be period-specific and limitation-linked.
    The GST demand-and-recovery framework is period-based: tax liability and limitation are tied to returns for each tax period or financial year, and limitation is computed from the annual return due date or an erroneous return for that year. Consolidating multiple financial years into one consolidated show cause notice is outside the statutory design and constitutes a jurisdictional defect; administrative advisories cannot override the period-specific statutory scheme. Authorities may, if no other impediment exists, initiate proceedings framed strictly period-wise under the applicable demand provisions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Gold/jewellery cases require mandatory section 138B admissibility for investigation statements before proving ownership or smuggling links.
    Section 138B creates a mandatory admissibility regime for section 108 investigation statements: unless clause (a) applies, the maker must be examined before the adjudicating authority and an admissibility opinion recorded before using those statements to prove truth. Ownership cannot be fixed on an appellant where such statements are excluded, and confiscation/penalty theories for jewellery must follow the correct statutory route-section 111 for imported goods and section 120 when alleging goods are made from smuggled inputs. Documentary explanations require verification before rejection.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Unsecured loans through banking channels cannot be treated as unexplained credits absent transaction specific incriminating material.
    Unsecured bank routed loans cannot be treated as unexplained credits where the assessee produced confirmations, lender bank statements, audited accounts and tax filings, and the Assessing Officer relied chiefly on uncorroborated third party search statements or administrative press releases without transaction specific incriminating material. For years prior to the Finance Act, 2022 amendment, a generalized source of source obligation for loan credits is not mandated; repayments in the lender's account are distinct from fresh upstream borrowings. Appellate authorities may independently verify facts under their powers if the AO is given opportunity to respond.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment jurisdiction: both JAO and FAO held to have concurrent authority, pending apex resolution of the faceless regime.
    The Delhi High Court holds that both JAO and FAO possess concurrent jurisdiction to initiate reassessment under Section 148, construing Section 151A as administrative/enabling rather than jurisdiction-extinguishing. It reasons that routine SLP dismissals do not automatically create binding Article 141 precedent to overturn a coordinate-bench High Court view, and declines to treat the Delhi precedent as per incuriam absent a contrary Supreme Court ratio; interim apex stays are case-specific and do not displace the Delhi position.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Cheque dishonour cases: statutory presumptions preserved; tax breaches don't negate enforceability; procedural reforms directed.
    Once a cheque's execution is admitted, statutory presumptions of consideration and of a legally enforceable debt arise and, though rebuttable, the initial burden lies on the accused; unsupported claims of payer incapacity or a 'blank cheque' are insufficient without positive evidence. Breach of tax-related cash-transaction rules attracts fiscal penalties but does not render the underlying loan unenforceable for cheque-dishonour purposes. Revisional courts may not overturn concurrent factual findings absent perversity or jurisdictional error. Procedural reforms and calibrated compounding measures are directed to expedite and streamline Section 138 proceedings.

    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