Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
GST ▸
Central GST ▸
Integrated GST + ▸
UTGST / SGST ▸
GST Case Laws + ▸
Income Tax ▸
Income Tax ▸
Allied (Direct Tax) ▸
Income Tax Case Laws ▸
DTAA ▸
International Taxation ▸
Customs ▸
Customs Act / Rules ▸
Notifications / Forms ▸
Circulars / Tariff ▸
Case Laws / Manual ▸
FTP/SEZ ▸
Foreign Trade ▸
Notifications / Circulars / Appendix / Forms ▸
Special Economic Zone (SEZ) ▸
Corp. Law ▸
Company Laws ▸
Standards / Trusts ▸
Partnership / LLP / Societies ▸
Case Laws ▸
FEMA ▸
FEMA / FCRA ▸
Notifications / Circulars ▸
Manual / FAQ ▸
FEMA Case Laws ▸
SEBI / IBC ▸
SEBI ▸
SEBI Case Laws ▸
IBC ▸
IBC - Case Laws ▸
PMLA ▸
Benami Property ▸
Black Money ▸
Money Laundering ▸
Vivad ▸
Direct Tax ▸
Indirect Taxes ▸
Indian Laws ▸
Indian Laws ▸
Bharatiya Nyaya 2023 ▸
Finance Acts & Bills / Amendment Acts ▸
Case Laws ▸
Labour Laws ▸
Labour Code ▸
Old / Others ▸
Central Excise ▸
Central Excise - Cases ▸
Wealth Tax ▸
Service Tax ▸
Service Tax Cases ▸
CST / DVAT ▸
CST / VAT / Sales Tax ▸
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
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
  6. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  7. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
    8. 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
    Retrospective Amendments and the Doctrine of Vested Rights: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Upholding Equality: HC Strikes Down Discriminatory Circular on Charitable Trust Approvals
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Review of Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) Orders: Navigating the Boundaries
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Assessee's Lackadaisical Conduct Leads to Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Appeal Scheme: Lessons from the Judgement on Delayed Filing and Deduction u/...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Unraveling the Maze of Round-Tripping: The Doctrine of "Source of Source" in Share Capital Transacti...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 153C and the Necessity of AO's Satisfaction: A Detailed Judicial Analysis
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Royalty or Business Income? High Court Clarifies Taxation of Remittances against Software Purchase
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Complexities
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Faceless Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment: Validity of Notice Issued by the Jurisdictional A...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Court Upholds Deduction for Operational Hotel under Section 35AD Despite Administrative Delays
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Landmark Ruling: Leasing Businesses Entitled to Depreciation Benefits
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Court Decision on Convertible Debentures Expenses : Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
❮
❯
❯❯
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:

Open Link
Notes
All › Income Tax
Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
Results Found:
Show All Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Retrospective Amendments and the Doctrine of Vested Rights: A Judicial Perspective
Show AI Summary
Vested rights preserved against retrospective tax amendments; filings made before enactment remain effective for settlement consideration.
The court addressed whether a retrospective Finance Act amendment prohibiting settlement applications from a specified date could divest a taxpayer who filed earlier of its vested right to have the application considered. It held that retrospective legislation cannot take away rights already accrued by actions completed before enactment unless clearly intended; that section 119 confers time-extension power but cannot impose new substantive eligibility conditions; and that administrative delay by revenue does not justify denying access where an application was already filed.
Case Laws Income Tax
Upholding Equality: HC Strikes Down Discriminatory Circular on Charitable Trust Approvals
Show AI Summary
Reasonable classification principle: differential deadline for charitable trust tax recognition cannot lack rational basis or equality protection.
A departmental circular extended a filing deadline for tax recognition to mitigate hardship but excluded newly formed charitable trusts without offering reasons; the exclusion lacked an intelligible differentia and rational nexus to the circular's object, making the differential treatment arbitrary and ultra vires the constitutional guarantee of equality, requiring the excluded applications to be treated as within time and decided on merits.
Case Laws Income Tax
Judicial Review of Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) Orders: Navigating the Boundaries
Show AI Summary
ITSC jurisdiction extends beyond application disclosures, while full and true disclosure and narrow judicial review govern settlement oversight.
The Income Tax Settlement Commission may inquire into and decide issues disclosed in the application and any other matters relating to the case as reflected in the Commissioner's report or uncovered by further inquiry; full and true disclosure is mandatory and amendments or contradictory positions that undermine that requirement are impermissible, yet contesting taxability before the Commission does not automatically negate disclosure; judicial review is limited to statutory contravention, prejudice, fraud, bias or malice, while sufficiency of materials placed before the Commission is generally beyond routine court scrutiny.
Case Laws Income Tax
Assessee's Lackadaisical Conduct Leads to Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal
Show AI Summary
Delay condonation denied where litigant's evasive conduct and non participation failed to constitute sufficient cause for appeal filing.
The court refused condonation of delay for filing an appeal where a best judgment assessment treated cash bank deposits as unexplained after the assessee failed to file returns or participate in proceedings; reliance on transition to a faceless e filing regime and lack of alerts was held insufficient, as the assessee's evasive and habitual non participation did not amount to sufficient cause warranting condonation under the applicable doctrine.
Case Laws Income Tax
Navigating the Faceless Appeal Scheme: Lessons from the Judgement on Delayed Filing and Deduction u/...
Show AI Summary
Sufficient cause for delay in filing appeals rejected where faceless scheme migration did not excuse prolonged inaction.
The court held that migration to a faceless appeal system did not, without persuasive evidence, constitute sufficient cause to condone a lengthy delay in filing an appeal, finding the explanation reflective of litigant inaction rather than unavoidable impediment. On tax deduction, the court applied authority that a non-obstante clause does not negate the employer's obligation to deposit employees' statutory contributions by the due date as a condition for claiming the deduction, and treated the appeal as meritless and barred by limitation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Unraveling the Maze of Round-Tripping: The Doctrine of "Source of Source" in Share Capital Transacti...
Show AI Summary
Source of source doctrine used to pierce the corporate veil where share capital appears round tripped among related entities.
The assessee must prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of investors under section 68; examination extends to the true origin of funds where bank records show circular transfers, related party directorships, lack of business operations, and arbitrary share premium, permitting lifting the corporate veil and application of the source of source doctrine to treat such receipts as not satisfactorily explained.
Case Laws Income Tax
Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
Show AI Summary
Transfer of assessment proceedings for coordinated investigations and administrative convenience upheld where procedural safeguards and factual links exist.
The judgment explains that transfers of assessment proceedings pursuant to the statutory transfer power may be justified for coordinated enquiries and administrative convenience, provided the decision is not capricious or mala fide. Authorities must afford an opportunity to be heard and consider objections; where factual indicia exist - for example, disclosed transactions such as unsecured loans with searched persons - centralisation can be sustained. The convenience of the assessee is relevant but subservient to effective adjudication and tax collection, and transfers supported by procedural compliance and factual nexus are not arbitrary.
Case Laws Income Tax
Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
Show AI Summary
Burden of proof in share premium cases: failure to prove investor identity and genuineness sustains addition under section 68.
The assessment of share premium under section 68 requires the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of investors who subscribe at a premium. The court scrutinised disparate allotments made on consecutive days, examined subscribing companies' financials, and applied the doctrine of "source of source" restrictively, holding that incorporation papers or bank payments alone do not discharge the burden. Absent cogent evidence tracing funds to lawful origin and demonstrating commercial rationale for large premiums, additions under section 68 are supportable.
Case Laws Income Tax
Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
Show AI Summary
Strict construction of penalty provisions prevents penalty where taxpayer disclosed omitted income before assessment notice.
The legal focal point is whether Section 271(1)(c) can be invoked where an assessee disclosed omitted income and paid differential tax before initiation of reassessment. Penal provisions require strict construction, and Explanation 1 treats a pre-notice satisfactory explanation and admission of additional income as accepted, precluding characterization as concealment. Additionally, a penalty notice must specify the particular ground for proceeding; failure to do so renders the notice defective and undermines the basis for penalty.
Case Laws Income Tax
Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
Show AI Summary
Scope of reassessment: AO may address newly noticed income but remains constrained by the recorded reasons for reopening.
Where the AO has recorded reasons to believe income escaped assessment, the AO may assess or reassess issues that come to notice during reassessment, but if no additions or modifications are ultimately made in respect of the issues that formed the basis for reopening, the AO cannot make additions or modifications relating solely to other matters that were part of the original assessment. Explanation 3 applies only after reassessment power is validly invoked and cannot be used to deviate from or supplant the recorded reasons.
Case Laws Income Tax
Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
Show AI Summary
Corroboration requirement for search statements: unsupported search statements cannot sustain additions without linked incriminating material and fair cross examination.
Additions for alleged accommodation entries cannot rest solely on statements recorded during search operations; such statements require corroboration by material found in the search that is specifically linked to the assessee. The assessing officer must articulate a factual nexus between seized group material and the assessee, and procedural fairness-including provision of relevant statements and opportunity for cross-examination-is essential. Cure provisions do not validate jurisdictional defects arising from absence of requisite notice or lack of incriminating material.
Case Laws Income Tax
Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
Show AI Summary
Registration under Section 80G: provisional approval permits subsequent final registration regardless of prior commencement of activities.
The Tribunal held that institutions granted provisional approval under the First Proviso to Section 80G(5) are entitled to apply for final registration under the proviso's final-registration clause, and that the relevant date of commencement is to be counted from activities undertaken after grant of provisional registration; a prior commencement of activities before provisional grant cannot alone justify rejection of a final-approval application.
Case Laws Income Tax
Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
Show AI Summary
Search assessment provisions under Sections 153A and 153C override ordinary reassessment time limits; asset-threshold verification required.
The judgment holds that search-triggered assessment provisions function as non-obstante clauses displacing ordinary reassessment time limits, distinguishes the enduring liability to tax from the temporal right to assess, prescribes that block periods are computed from the year of search (or date of receipt of seized records for non-searched persons), and treats the asset-represented income threshold as a mandatory, aggregable precondition requiring the assessing officer's recorded satisfaction.
Case Laws Income Tax
Section 153C and the Necessity of AO's Satisfaction: A Detailed Judicial Analysis
Show AI Summary
Seized-material nexus under Section 153C: AO must form reasoned satisfaction before reopening assessments for specific years.
Section 153C requires the Assessing Officer to form a reasoned satisfaction that seized material during a search has a bearing on an assessee's total income before initiating assessments; mere discovery is insufficient, and the AO must identify specific assessment years, map incriminating material year-wise, and record reasons to justify abatement or reopening.
Case Laws Income Tax
Royalty or Business Income? High Court Clarifies Taxation of Remittances against Software Purchase
Show AI Summary
Royalty classification of software payments: remittances for software purchases are not treated as royalty under established precedent.
Where distribution agreements or End User License Agreements do not grant any proprietary interest or a right to use copyright, payments for acquiring computer software are not to be characterised as royalty; this conclusion follows controlling precedent and DTAA considerations and renders an Assessing Officer's contrary classification inconsistent with the correct legal interpretation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Complexities
Show AI Summary
Reopening assessments: procedural compliance and substantive escapement requirements determine validity of reassessment notices.
The judgment examines validity of notices under Section 148, holding that TOLA does not apply retrospectively for the assessment year at issue and notices issued after the statutory cutoff cannot be back-dated. Notices barred by the limitation in Section 149(1) are ineffective. Procedural prerequisites - notably issuance of a Document Identification Number and issuance through automated allocation by the faceless centre rather than direct action by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer - are mandatory. Substantively, reopening requires escapement of income in the form of an asset, expenditure, transaction, event, or book entry; a mere change of opinion or dispute over an ordinarily allowed deduction does not meet that threshold.
Case Laws Income Tax
Faceless Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment: Validity of Notice Issued by the Jurisdictional A...
Show AI Summary
Faceless assessment: issuance of section 148 reopening notices by jurisdictional assessing officers inconsistent with faceless regime.
The faceless assessment framework under Section 151A and the Scheme dated 29 March 2022 allocates exclusive jurisdiction to either the Faceless Assessment Officer or the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for issuance of reopening notices and assessments; actions by an authority outside its assigned jurisdiction are inconsistent with the faceless regime and cause prejudice to the taxpayer as a matter of law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Court Upholds Deduction for Operational Hotel under Section 35AD Despite Administrative Delays
Show AI Summary
Deduction eligibility for operational hotels affirmed despite administrative delay in star classification, focusing on substantive compliance.
The court addressed entitlement to a deduction under Section 35AD(5)(aa) where a hotel began operations and generated income in the relevant year and a timely application for star classification was submitted, but formal certification was delayed due to administrative inspections; the court applied a purposive construction to allow the deduction when substantive operational conditions were satisfied and delay was not the assessee's fault.
Case Laws Income Tax
Landmark Ruling: Leasing Businesses Entitled to Depreciation Benefits
Show AI Summary
Depreciation entitlement for leasing companies where contractual ownership and business use are established, allowing higher depreciation rates.
A lessor retains entitlement to depreciation where lease terms demonstrate exclusive ownership rights, repossession power, return obligations and inspection rights, and where the asset is used in the course of the lessor's leasing business; actual physical use by the lessor is not required. Leasing activity that functionally equates to hiring can qualify assets for an enhanced rate of depreciation despite registration in the lessee's name.
Case Laws Income Tax
Court Decision on Convertible Debentures Expenses : Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
Show AI Summary
Revenue classification of debenture issuance expenses upheld as revenue expenditure despite later conversion into equity.
Expenses incurred to issue convertible debentures that are raised to provide working capital are to be treated as revenue expenditure because classification depends on the purpose and usage of the expenditure, and future conversion into shares does not change its revenue character.

TMI Notes

All › Income Tax
Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Home › TMI Notes › Income Tax › Act-Rules › Category › This
Back

All TMI Notes

Income Tax

Comparison of Section 26 "Income under head Profits and gains of business or profession" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

20 August, 2025

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Print Options

Section 26 Income under head "Profits and gains of business or profession".

Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

At a Glance

These documents present the enacted Section 26 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 ["As Passed"] (Document 1) and an earlier draft of Clause 26 in the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (Document 2). Both provisions charge income under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession" and set out an inclusive list of items treated as business/professional income. The changes between the two texts are largely phrasing and cross-reference adjustments, with a few substantive drafting shifts that may affect the scope of recapture and the cross-referenced deduction regime. Affected parties include taxpayers carrying on business or profession, partners and firms, and the tax department; effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: both texts are presented as Clause/Section 26 under the Income Tax Bill/Act, 2025 and fall under the Part D heading "Profits and gains of business or profession". The clause(s) seek to define income chargeable under that head and provide an inclusive list of items to be regarded as such income. The texts contain internal cross-references to other provisions - e.g., section 35(e), section 35AD of the Income-tax Act, 1961, section 46 and in the older draft a reference to "Chapter IV-D". Definitions beyond the inclusive list are Not stated in the document. The documents do not state commencement/notification details.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

Both versions establish that income from any business or profession carried on during the tax year is chargeable under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession". Each provides an inclusive list (sub-section (2)) covering: profits/gains of business or profession; compensation/payments on termination/modification of management/agency/contract; compensation for vesting management in Government; income of trade/professional associations for services to members; profits on sale of licences or export incentives; value of benefits/perquisites from business/profession; partner remuneration/amounts from firm; sums for not carrying out business activity or for not sharing know-how/intangible rights; Keyman insurance proceeds; fair market value of inventory when converted/treated as capital asset; and specific recapture where a capital asset (other than land/goodwill/financial instrument) is demolished/destroyed/discarded/transferred and its whole expenditure was allowed as a deduction under specified provisions.

Interpretation

The texts adopt an inclusive definition approach: items listed are expressly brought into business/professional income. The language used (e.g., "shall include") indicates a non-exhaustive list as typical in tax charging provisions. The enacted text shifts certain cross-references and expands the recapture reference to other statutory provisions (see below). Legislative intent as an overarching aim is to capture receipts related to business/professional activity and to provide recapture rules where capital allowances/deductions have been previously claimed - explicit legislative intent beyond the text is Not stated in the document.

Exceptions/Provisos

The provision contains specific carve-outs in sub-clause (h)(i)(A) and (B) excluding (A) sums received on transfer of rights chargeable under the head "Capital gains" and (B) compensation from the Montreal Protocol multilateral fund under terms agreed with Government of India. Sub-section (4) excludes rental income from letting of residential house by the owner from this head and directs that such income be charged under "Income from house property". Other general exceptions or thresholds are Not stated in the document.

Illustrations

  • Example 1: A partner receives salary/commission from the firm. The payment is included under clause (g) and is to be treated in accordance with the extent allowed under the deduction cross-reference (Document 1: "section 35(e)"; Document 2: "Chapter IV-D").
  • Example 2: A company sells an import licence and realises a profit on sale; this profit is included under clause (e) as business income.
  • Example 3: Machinery (a capital asset other than land/goodwill/financial instrument) on which the whole expenditure was allowed under the cited deduction provision is demolished and some sum is received; clause (k) brings the receipt into business income (but the governing deduction reference differs between the texts).

Interplay

Both variants cross-refer to other provisions for deductions and for recapture. The enacted text explicitly references section 35(e) and u/s 35AD of the Income-tax Act, 1961 alongside section 46 of the 2025 Act for recapture scenarios; the earlier draft references "Chapter IV-D" for partner remuneration and refers only to section 46 for recapture. Any interplay with Rules, Notifications or Circulars is Not stated in the document.

Differences Between Documents and Practical Impact

  • Opening paragraph/sub-section (1) wording: Old draft states "The income from any business or profession carried on by the assessee at any time during the tax year shall be chargeable...". Enacted version states "The incomes referred to in sub-section (2) shall be chargeable...".
    • Practical impact: drafting shift narrows the immediate charging phrase to the items enumerated in sub-section (2), while the prior draft framed the charge as broader "income from any business or profession". The practical interpretive difference is limited because both texts ultimately list the items; the enacted wording may emphasise the inclusive list as the operative charge. The precise legal effect is contingent on interpretive practice and is Not stated in the document.
  • Clause (e): Old text uses "input licence"; enacted text uses "import licence".
    • Practical impact: this is a material textual difference. If "input licence" in the old draft was unintended or a drafting error, the enacted text clarifies that profits on sale of import licences are included. The documents do not state whether "input licence" was an error or intended; therefore, the practical effect is that the enacted text clearly captures profits on sale of import licences and similar export incentives. Any consequences for licences termed "input licence" are Not stated in the document.
  • Clause (g) - cross-reference for partner payments: Old draft refers to deduction "under Chapter IV-D" as a deduction in computing the firm's income; enacted text refers to "section 35(e) as a deduction in computing the income of the firm".
    • Practical impact: this is a substantive cross-reference change which may alter how partner payments are assessed against firm deductions. Whether section 35(e) reproduces, narrows or expands the former Chapter IV-D rules is Not stated in the document; stakeholders must compare the referenced provisions to determine precise tax treatment and availment of deductions.
  • Clause (h)(ii) - scope of excluded consideration verbiage: Old draft ends with "information or technical know-how likely to assist..." whereas enacted text reads "information or technique likely to assist...".
    • Practical impact: marginal wording change; potential interpretive nuance between "technical know-how" and "information or technique" may slightly broaden or shift the class of protected items, but the documents provide no legislative clarification on intent.
  • Clause (j) - manner of valuation: Old draft uses "determined in the manner, as prescribed"; enacted text uses "determined in the manner, as may be prescribed".
    • Practical impact: enacted wording explicitly contemplates rule-making power ("may be prescribed"), but both formulations are typically used to enable subordinate legislation; the practical change is minimal and procedural - specific rules are Not stated in the document.
  • Clause (k)(ii) - recapture reference: Old draft brought sums into business income where whole of the expenditure had been allowed as a deduction "u/s 46". Enacted text broadens the reference to "u/s 35AD of the Income-tax Act, 1961 or section 46 of this Act."
    • Practical impact: the enacted version expressly captures cases where capital asset expenditure was allowed u/s 35AD (1961 Act) in addition to section 46 of the 2025 Act, thereby broadening recapture to assets benefiting from section 35AD allowances. This is a substantive expansion of recapture scope; however, the precise operation depends on the text of section 35AD and section 46, which are Not stated in the document.
  • General drafting and punctuation differences: There are minor editorial and structural differences (e.g., "by whatever name called" vs "by whatever named called", placement of commas and hyphens).
    • Practical impact: mostly stylistic, though consistent drafting reduces interpretive ambiguity.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers should note the broadened recapture reference (inclusion of u/s 35AD of the Income-tax Act, 1961) - assets whose costs were wholly allowed under such provisions may generate business income upon demolition/destruction/discard/transfer. Firms and partners must review the applicable deduction cross-reference (section 35(e) in enacted text) when accounting for partner remuneration and when determining firm taxable income. The documents do not provide procedural guidance or transitional rules; transitional treatment is Not stated in the document.
  • Record-keeping/evidence: Where receipts arise from termination/modification of management/agency/contract, sale of licences, non-competition agreements, or Keyman insurance proceeds, taxpayers should retain contracts, calculation workings, valuations (for fair market value of inventory converted to capital asset), details of allowances claimed u/s 35AD or section 46, and firm resolution/partnership deeds evidencing partner payments - the document does not prescribe specific records but the inclusive list implies evidentiary needs relevant to these items.

Key Takeaways

  • Both texts adopt an inclusive list of items treated as income from business or profession; enacted text rephrases the charging language to focus on the items enumerated in sub-section (2).
  • Enacted text clarifies "import licence" (instead of "input licence" in draft), which clarifies inclusion of profits on sale of import licences/export incentives.
  • Cross-reference for partner remuneration shifted from "Chapter IV-D" (draft) to "section 35(e)" (enacted), which may affect deduction mechanics - compare the referenced provisions to determine impact.
  • Recapture scope expanded in the enacted text to include cases where whole expenditure was allowed u/s 35AD of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in addition to section 46 - potentially broader taxability on demolition/destruction/discard/transfer of certain capital assets.
  • Several wording and drafting adjustments are editorial in nature; where substantive differences exist, the documents do not supply the surrounding provision texts or legislative history to resolve interpretive issues.

Full Text:

Section 26 Income under head "Profits and gains of business or profession".

Topics

Acts Income Tax
Next ➔