Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ 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 characters 0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

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.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Through Reimbursement Expenses, DDT Refunds, and Transfer Pricing Adjustments
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Financial Distress: A Legal Analysis of Progressive Tax Instalment Judgments
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Deciphering Tax Implications on Capital Reduction: Navigating the Complexities of Section 115QA in I...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting Section 153A: ITAT Delhi's Stand on Incriminating Material in Assessments: Assessments ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reaffirming the Bounds of Section 153A: Analysis of Delhi High Court's Approach: Assessment post sea...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Rectification and Revised Returns: Legal Insights from ITAT Bangalore's Ruling
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Mutual Fund Gains and Deemed Dividends: Analyzing the Delhi High Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessing Income under Section 147 Post-Quashment of Sections 153A/153C: The Waiver of Limitation ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 153A of the Income Tax Act: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court's Interpretation in the...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Clarity and Precision in Tax Penalty Proceedings: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Jurisdictional Challenges in Tax Assessments: Insights from a Recent ITAT Decision
    Case Laws Income Tax
    High Court Rules on the Invalidity of Reassessment Notices Issued to a Deceased Person
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Long-Term Capital Gains and Unexplained Cash Credits in Stock Transactions: A Legal Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Approach in Transfer Pricing and PE Attribution: Analysis of a Landmark Case: Legal Perspec...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Scrutinizing the Application of Mind in Tax Assessments: Examining the Role of ACIT while granting a...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    TDS Obligations and DTAA: Clarifying Tax Jurisdiction in International Telecom Services
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Distinction Between Business Income and Deemed Income in Income Tax Assessments: Higher rate of tax ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analysis of ITAT's Decision on Surplus Stock Taxation
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Transfer pricing adjustments shape ALP analysis and documentation requirements for royalties and management fees.
Dispute involves deductibility of cross border reimbursement payments under Section 37 and whether assessing authorities recorded specific factual findings and afforded fair opportunity before disallowance. Related issues include entitlement to refund of excess Dividend Distribution Tax under the DTAA and the correct application of the Arm's Length Principle-notably choice between TNMM and CUP-for benchmarking royalty and management fees, with emphasis on documentation and comparability analysis.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Instalment payments: courts permit flexible tax instalment schedules for financially distressed corporates while respecting lower court discretion.
The courts endorsed a flexible instalment framework permitting extension and adjustment of tax payment schedules when a corporate taxpayer demonstrates reduced capacity to pay, including temporary reduction of individual instalments with deficits spread over remaining payments. The appellate decision upheld the lower court's discretion, emphasising deference absent clear error and supporting reasonableness and proportionality in accommodating financial distress while preserving eventual recovery of assessed liabilities.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Capital reduction transactions treated outside buyback levy when executed pre amendment; buyback tax not attracted.
The Tribunal held that the capital reduction did not qualify as a buyback for purposes of the buyback tax provision because the transaction was completed before the amendment that broadened the provision's definition; relying on precedents distinguishing capital reduction from buybacks, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's tax avoidance contention and emphasised that the transaction date governs applicability of the amended definition.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Incriminating material requirement: Section 153A assessments require material specific to the assessee, not unrelated third party statements.
Assessments following search operations must be grounded on incriminating material specifically linked to the assessee; material or statements derived from separate or third party search proceedings cannot, alone, serve as incriminating material against an unrelated assessee. Absent assesseespecific incriminating material, additions and disallowances in such assessments lack justification and cannot properly form the basis of adverse tax adjustments.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Admissibility of search statements: corroborative evidence required before additions in post-search tax assessments.
Statements recorded under Section 132(4) have evidentiary value but cannot alone justify additions under Section 153A; corroborative material discovered during the search is required, and taxpayers must be afforded the opportunity to cross-examine and rebut adverse statements before assessments under Section 153A are finalized.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Rectification under Section 154: procedural lapses should not bar correction of apparent errors in tax returns.
Interpretation of Section 154 treats misplacement of figures in an original return as a mistake apparent from the record, qualifying for statutory rectification; a revised return filed as a genuine corrective attempt may be recognised despite procedural lapses, and tax authorities should balance procedural compliance with the need to remedy apparent errors and assist taxpayers in claiming corrections.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Classification of Mutual Fund Gains: affirmed as capital gains, clarifies tests distinguishing business income and scope of deemed dividends.
Classification of gains from mutual fund redemptions turns on intent, transaction frequency, holding period, accounting treatment and the factual matrix to determine capital gains versus business income. Distinguishing genuine capital contributions from transactions that function as distributions is essential before treating receipts as deemed dividends; absent characteristics of a loan or advance against profits, capital infusions should not be recharacterised as dividends.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reopening assessments under Section 147 requires proper review when Section 150(2) waiver is contested, not clarification.
Reopening of assessments under Section 147 concerns whether the Assessing Officer has a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and is subject to procedural safeguards including issuance of a statutory notice. Where prior assessments made in consequence of a search under provisions for search-based assessment were quashed, the question arises whether fresh proceedings may be initiated for income not arising from incriminating material found in the search and whether the limitation period can be waived under Section 150(2) to permit issuance of a notice for reassessment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Scope of assessment post-search: completed assessments permit additions only from incriminating material found during searches.
The Supreme Court clarified that for assessments completed before a search, the Assessing Officer's power to reassess within the retrospective period is constrained: any additions in such completed assessments must be based on incriminating material discovered during the search, thereby limiting use of search powers to matters tied to the unearthed evidence and preventing expansion of assessments on unrelated material.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Specificity in penalty notices: requirement to identify exact charge prevents defective proceedings and safeguards procedural fairness.
Applicability of penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars requires the assessing officer to specify the exact limb under which proceedings are initiated; absence of that specificity renders the penalty notice defective, undermines procedural fairness, and justifies setting aside the penalty, thereby obliging tax authorities to adhere to precise notice requirements when invoking penal provisions.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Jurisdictional validity of tax notice: lack of proper jurisdiction can vitiate assessment proceedings and nullify further action.
The dominant operative point is that a valid scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) requires issuance by an officer with lawful jurisdiction determined by income thresholds and administrative instructions; failure in jurisdictional competence can render the notice and ensuing assessment proceedings invalid. Procedural fairness-specifically the opportunity to be heard-is a corollary concern, and while issues regarding additions under Section 69A and the tax effect of Section 115BBE are raised, they become academic if the initiation itself is found jurisdictionally flawed.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Validity of reassessment notices: notices issued to a deceased person are void and must be directed to the correct legal entity.
The High Court held that reassessment notices issued in the name of a deceased assessee are null and void, constituting substantive illegality when directed to a non-existent person; the court emphasized that the correct legal entity must be addressed, that the legal heir's communications and filings were material, and that procedural protections and statutory reopening procedures cannot be bypassed due to administrative or IT constraints.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Long-term capital gains preserved where transaction records establish genuineness; mere broker misconduct is insufficient evidence.
The issue is whether gains from sale of low-priced shares are long-term capital gains or unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The authorities suspected accommodation entries via a broker with a tainted history, but transaction documents-bills, bank payments and contract notes-were held to establish genuineness. Mere suspicion of broker misconduct was deemed insufficient without direct evidence linking the assessee to contrived entries; evidentiary standards and fair hearing obligations were decisive.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Permanent establishment attribution: precedent-driven analysis limits taxable profit allocation to where core value is created in digital services.
The principal issue is attribution of profits to a Permanent Establishment for cross-border digital reservation services, requiring a fact-sensitive analysis of where core business activities and value creation occur; judicial reasoning relied on materially similar precedent to determine the appropriate share of revenue attributable to the PE, stressing that a mere business connection or digital presence does not automatically justify full profit allocation to the jurisdiction and that clear tracing of value creation is essential to avoid double taxation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Application of mind in tax approvals: inadequate ACIT scrutiny under Section 153D can invalidate assessments.
The core issue is whether the ACIT, when granting approval under Section 153D, performed a genuine application of mind by scrutinising assessment records and search material; the Tribunal and High Court found the approval lacked adequate examination, leading to inconsistencies between additions made by the assessing officer and the assessed income, and rendering the assessment unreliable. The matter was treated as factual rather than presenting a substantial question of law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Royalty characterisation: cross-border telecom payments not taxable as royalty, limiting TDS and extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Payments by an Indian telecom operator to non-resident carriers for interconnectivity and capacity transfers are not to be characterised as royalty under the applicable DTAA and therefore do not attract TDS; DTAA interpretation governs characterization, Indian jurisdiction is limited over extra territorial income where the foreign entities lack a taxable presence, and retrospective amendments do not impose tax on past transactions compliant with the law at the time.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Deemed income classification denied where surrendered receipts are linked to business activities, avoiding higher tax rate.
Where surrendered cash, advances and stock discrepancies identified in a survey are linked to ordinary business activities and the assessee supplies specific explanations of source and nexus, the deeming provisions for unexplained investments and unrecorded ownership do not automatically apply; accordingly the higher-rate taxation applicable to incomes classified as deemed income is inapplicable and the amounts are treated as business income for tax purposes.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Surplus stock classification: accounting linkage to business determines treatment as business income over unexplained investment.
Classification of surplus stock found during a section 133A survey depends on its nexus with ordinary trading and documentary accounting. Where excess inventory is recorded in the stock register and credited to partners' capital account, these accounting entries indicate it forms part of regular business stock and support treatment as business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B, affecting applicability of special tax treatment under section 115BBE.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
DIN requirement in tax administration: absence of mandatory DIN can invalidate assessment orders unless exceptional circumstances apply.
Failure to quote the mandatory computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) in assessment orders, as required by the CBDT Circular from 1 October 2019, constitutes a procedural defect that can render the order invalid unless the revenue demonstrates that the issuance fell within the Circular's narrowly drawn exceptional circumstances; the Tribunal found such non-compliance in the order dated 15 October 2019 and the High Court affirmed, while the Supreme Court granted interim stay for further consideration.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Capitation fee allegations challenge admissibility and attribution of seized evidence in charitable trust tax exemption inquiries.
Alleged collection of capitation fees by a registered charitable trust threatens its exemption under Section 11; most evidence was seized from employees' residences, invoking the presumption under Section 132(4A) and raising attribution issues. Employee admissions later retracted, similar statement drafting, declarations under the Income Declaration Scheme 2016, and trustees' acknowledgments create contradictory evidentiary threads that complicate admissibility, credibility, and whether the seized funds can be treated as trust income.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Comparison of Section 19 "Deductions from salaries" 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 19 Deductions from salaries.

Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

At a Glance

Document considered: Clause 19 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) - provision for deductions from salaries. It matters because it defines which receipts and amounts are deductible/exempt from salary income for income-tax computation, affecting taxpayers (employees), employers (withholding), and the tax department. Effective date/decision date: Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: Clause 19 sets out deductions under the head "Salaries" and cross-references the Industrial Disputes Act, Payment of Gratuity Act, Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules and Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021. Context and coverage: The clause enumerates categories of exempt or deductible receipts (tax on employment, standard deduction, various gratuities, commutation of pension, compensation on retrenchment/transfer/closure, voluntary retirement compensation, cash equivalent of leave encashment).

Definitions: The text supplies operational definitions and computational formulas (e.g., for gratuity: Amount = 1/2 (A x B); definition of A and B), and notes when "salary" includes dearness allowance for specified items. No separate section containing standalone definitions is provided. Where definitions or further clarifications are absent, the document does not state them explicitly.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

The clause operates by providing a Table of specified categories of sums (Serial Nos. 1-14) and the extent of deduction/exemption for each. Major categories: (1) tax on employment (Article 276(2) dues) - entire amount; (2) standard deduction - Rs.75,000 (where tax computed under s.202(1)) or Rs.50,000 otherwise; (3) death-cum-retirement gratuity - entire amount; (4) retiring gratuity under Pension Code/defence regulations - entire; (5) gratuity under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - amount limited by s.4(2)/(3) of that Act; (6) other gratuity - minimum of actual received, notified Government limit, and half-month salary per completed year (with formula); (7-9) commutation of pension situations - entire or specified commuted values; (10-11) compensation on retrenchment or under approved schemes - minimums and deemed compensation categories; (12) voluntary retirement payments - minimum of compensation received and Rs.5,00,000; (13-14) encashment of earned leave (central/state government employees: entire; others: restricted by formula and notified caps). Sub-section (2) provides cardinal rules for aggregation, inclusion of dearness allowance, deemed compensation definitions, employer/workman meanings (by reference to Industrial Disputes Act), and conditions for schemes qualifying under serial 12.

Interpretation

Legislative intent: The text aims to clarify which employee receipts are to be excluded from taxable salary income and to prescribe computation methods and ceilings. Interpretive principles evident: specificity (itemising categories), cross-referencing to other enactments for computation limits, limiting aggregation across years to prevent cumulative double benefit (A - B formula), and distinguishing government employees from others for certain benefits (e.g., leave encashment). The presence of formulas indicates intent to standardise computation rather than leave it to ad hoc interpretation.

Exceptions/Provisos

Carve-outs and conditions include:

  • Gratuity: When multiple gratuities are received in same tax year, aggregate deduction capped at A - B (A = notified limit; B = aggregate earlier exempt amounts).

  • Salary for purposes of certain entries includes dearness allowance if terms so provide, but excludes other allowances/perquisites.

  • Compensation items (10/11) include deemed compensation on closing down/transfer/less favourable terms, subject to categories (i)-(ii)(A)-(C).

  • Voluntary retirement (serial 12): subject to scheme governance (economic viability criteria), single-year allowance limitation and non-duplication if relief u/s 157 has been availed.

  • Leave encashment (serial 14): aggregation cap across employers for same tax year (A - B concept) and foregoing of other allowances for computation.

Illustrations

  • Example 1 - Gratuity for non-statutory employer: An employee retires having received actual gratuity of Rs.600,000; Central Government notified limit is Rs.500,000; half-month salary per year formula yields Rs.480,000. Deduction allowed = minimum of (600,000; 500,000; 480,000) = Rs.480,000. (All numbers illustrative and consistent with the textual formula.)

  • Example 2 - Leave encashment (non-government employee): Earned leave cash equivalent = Rs.200,000; average monthly salary B = Rs.15,000 so A = 10 x B = Rs.150,000; notified limit - Not stated in the document. Deduction allowed = minimum of (200,000; 150,000; notified limit (Not stated in the document); actual payment received 200,000) = Rs.150,000 (subject to notified limit if lower).

  • Example 3 - Voluntary retirement: Compensation received Rs.800,000; deduction capped at minimum of (compensation; Rs.5,00,000) = Rs.5,00,000.

Interplay

The clause expressly interacts with:

  • Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for statutory gratuity limits under serial 5).
  • Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for definitions of employer/workman and calculations under retrenchment-compensation entries).
  • Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 and Civil Pensions (Commutation) Rules (for pension commutation items).
  • Central Government notifications (for various notified limits referred to as A in aggregation formulas and for the schemes/specified institutions covered under serial 12 and serial 14 caps).

Other rules/notifications/circulars are referenced in general; specific notification numbers or dates are Not stated in the document.

Differences between Section 19 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed] and Clause 19 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version)

  • Ordering and textual phrasing: The As Passed version (Section 19) and the Old Bill (Clause 19) are substantially similar in structure and substantive content. Differences are primarily editorial and phrasing: Section 19 uses slightly different wording in some sub-clauses (for example, placement of clauses, punctuation and clause references such as "having regard to the age of the recipient, the state of his health, the rate of interest and officially recognised tables of mortality" appears integrated differently across clauses 8/8(a)-(b)). Practical impact: None substantial on tax outcomes; mainly drafting clarity improvements in the As Passed text.

  • References to statutory instruments and cross-references: Both documents reference similar Acts and Rules (Industrial Disputes Act, Payment of Gratuity Act, Civil Services pension rules etc.). The As Passed version expressly cites "Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021" in the same manner as the Old Bill, but some parenthetical and footnote-style phrasing is cleaner in the As Passed text. Practical impact: Minimal-no substantive change to the scope of exemptions or eligibility; the As Passed drafting reduces potential ambiguity in cross-references.

  • Computation formulas and examples: Both contain the same formulas (for gratuity/leave salary computation). The As Passed version appears to present the formula for gratuity (Amount = 1/2 (A x B)) with explicit labelling of A and B in the same way as the Old Bill; any minor variation is editorial. Practical impact: None to taxpayers' entitlement computations.

  • Conditions and provisos to serial numbers (e.g., serial 12 schemes and serial 14 aggregation limits): Both texts include the same conditional language, but the Old Bill contains some typographical or parenthetical variations (e.g., punctuation and bracket placements, "inter alia" vs "including, inter alia"). Practical impact: No substantive change in compliance obligations; possible marginal improvement in interpretive clarity in the As Passed text.

  • Terminology consistency: The As Passed text uses more standardised capitalization and consistent references (e.g., "Central Government" capitalised). Practical impact: Administrative/readability benefit; no change in legal effect.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers must correctly classify receipts (gratuity, commuted pension, leave encashment, retrenchment compensation, VRS receipts). Misclassification risks incorrect claim and potential reassessment. Aggregation rules (A - B) require tracing of earlier years' exempt amounts - record retention and historical tax filings are necessary.
  • Record-keeping/evidence: Maintain employer letters, scheme documents, calculation sheets (average salary A, completed years B), notifications relied upon for Government limits, proof of prior exemptions claimed (to compute B in A - B), and pension/commutation tables used for determining commuted value.

Key Takeaways

  • Clause 19 itemises 14 categories of salary-related receipts and prescribes the extent of deduction/exemption for each.
  • Standard deduction fixed at Rs.75,000 (s.202(1) cases) or Rs.50,000 otherwise.
  • Gratuity and leave encashment deductions are formula-driven and subject to notified caps and aggregation limits to prevent multiple claims across years.
  • Compensation on retrenchment and approved schemes may be fully exempt subject to minimum/notification constraints and qualifying scheme criteria.
  • Pension commutation rules specify fractions (one-third or one-half) and require actuarial commutation determinations (age, health, interest, mortality tables).
  • The clause relies heavily on cross-references to other statutes and Government notifications; those external instruments determine some caps and qualifying entities.
  • Taxpayers and employers must keep contemporaneous documentation and historical tax records to calculate allowable deductions under aggregation formulas.

 


Full Text:

Section 19 Deductions from salaries.

Topics

Acts Income Tax