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
    The Legal Contours of Input Tax Credit Eligibility: Procedural Aspects of GST and ITC
    Case LawsService Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour and Corporate Responsibility: Analyzing the Supreme Court's Latest Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Procedural Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice in Tax Administration: A High Court Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revision u/s 263 and denial of deduction u/s 80IA: A Critical Analysis of the Delhi High Court's Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Condonation of Delay and Jurisdictional Challenges: A Case Analysis of ITAT Kolkata's Decision
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis: Scrutiny of Share Capital and Premium Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Retrospective Cancellation of Charitable Trust Registration: A Case Analysis of...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Office and Prosecution under Income Tax Act: Jurisdiction of Trial Court - Decision in a High Profil...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxation of Unexplained Income at Higher Rate of tax u/s 115BBE : A Comprehensive Analysis of the IT...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Analysis of ITAT Mumbai Judgment - Transfer Pricing Adjustment Dispute: Period of limitation u/s 144...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    In-Depth Analysis of Key Issues in the ITAT Chennai Judgement
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Doctrine of Merger in Income Tax Assessment: An Analysis of ITAT Chennai's Recent Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delay in refund processing, the petitioner's entitlement to interest, and the court's decision to gr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Rejection of revision application u/s 264 in favor of assessee: A beneficial provision of Income Tax...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    An Analysis of ITAT Decision on International Taxation, Capital Gains, and DTAA
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxability of CSR fund: Treatment of certain funds received by an entity, particularly focusing on w...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis of ESOP Deduction and allowability in the Revised Return of income: An ITAT decision.
❯❯
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 LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility: procedural limits on reversing claims without supplier inquiry and GSTR-2A non-reflection not dispositive.
    Section 16(2) sets the statutory conditions for Input Tax Credit-tax invoice, receipt, tax payment, and return filing-and GSTR-2A serves only as a facilitator; non-reflection there does not automatically negate eligibility. Tax authorities must inquire into supplier conduct and observe procedural safeguards before reversing ITC or recovering tax from the recipient, with judicial precedents and CBIC clarifications shaping when exceptions may apply.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reverse charge mechanism: exporter not liable for foreign bank charges when Indian bank is the direct service recipient.
    The core issue is whether an exporter is liable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for foreign bank charges deducted from export proceeds when those charges are imposed on and paid by an Indian intermediary bank. The Tribunal's analysis focuses on the definition of service recipient and territorial scope, concluding that the direct recipient-the Indian bank-is the party liable to discharge service tax while the exporter, as an indirect beneficiary without direct dealings with the foreign bank, is not subject to reverse charge.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Directorial liability: strict averment requirement prevents presuming directors' responsibility without specific allegation, leading to quashing.
    The Court held that directorial liability requires specific averment that the director was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at the time of the offence; mere titular position or awareness of cheque issuance is insufficient. It emphasized the necessity of serving the statutory notice prerequisite and rejected liberal construction to cure absent statutory averments, quashing proceedings against directors for non-compliance.
    Case LawsIncome 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 LawsIncome 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.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax compliance: liberal interpretation protects bona fide taxpayers from technical disqualification.
    The court analysed whether delay in filing Form 10 could be condoned, considering the petitioner's unawareness of post 2016 amendments, CBDT circulars and precedent, and applying principles that each case be judged on its facts; it stressed that failure to claim accumulation does not by itself show absence of intent to comply and urged a liberal approach to mitigate genuine hardship and prevent procedural technicalities from defeating substantive justice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 263 limited to substantial legal errors; mere differences of opinion don't justify revisional tax action.
    Scope of Section 263 is confined to instances where an assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue in a substantial way, not mere differences of opinion. Migration of licences from IP VPN to NLD ILD does not, by itself, create a new undertaking defeating entitlement to deduction under Section 80IA(4)(ii), particularly where identical deductions were previously allowed; administrative migration requires clear proof of substantive change before re characterising eligibility.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Delay condonation based on sufficient cause upheld where illness, relocation and pandemic disruption justified late filing and jurisdictional challenge.
    The tribunal applied a purposive construction of sufficient cause to condone substantial delay where cumulative factors-serious illness, change of residence and pandemic disruption-made filing untimely. It also found the assessment infirm for want of territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction because the taxpayer had established residence and filing history in a different territorial unit and administrative guidance allocated jurisdiction accordingly, underscoring that proper vesting of authority is a condition precedent to valid assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Unexplained cash credits under Section 68 require taxpayers to prove investor identity and genuineness; authorities must rebut with evidence.
    Applicability of Section 68 requires the assessee to establish investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness-via PAN, tax returns, audited accounts and bank statements-and once this initial burden is satisfied, the burden shifts to the revenue to rebut with concrete evidence; mere suspicion or inability to trace an ultimate source does not alone justify additions if investments are reasonable relative to investors' net worth and effected through banking channels.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective cancellation of charitable trust registration invalidated due to lack of competent jurisdiction and procedural non compliance.
    The Tribunal invalidated the cancellation of a charitable trust's registration because the regional authority lacked competence to cancel under the statutory scheme and the transfer used to reassign the matter was improper; it further held that applying the newer cancellation provision retrospectively to deprive the trust of its recognized status was not legally tenable, emphasizing required notice, hearing and adherence to principled statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction in multi locational offences governs venue determination; magistrate discretion and supervisory thresholds shape tax prosecution forums under criminal procedure.
    The judgment analyses Cr.P.C. place of offence principles in multi locational tax prosecutions, assessing whether procedural acts like recording statements under the Income Tax Act determine venue. It evaluates the magistrate's discretion in taking cognizance where alleged offences span jurisdictions and outlines the threshold for superior court supervisory intervention, emphasising that extraordinary petitions require demonstration of abuse of process or exceptional circumstances before altering magistrate venue determinations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxation of unexplained income: higher-rate treatment applies, and deductions including partner salary are disallowed.
    The tribunal held that excess unrecorded stock and cash found on survey were assessable as unexplained investment and unexplained money, and that the special higher-rate taxation provision applies to such income, taxing it at a higher fixed rate and disallowing any deduction; consequently the claimed partner's salary relating to the unexplained investment was disallowed.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation under section 144C: assessment issued beyond statutory period, leaving transfer pricing adjustment unresolved on procedural grounds.
    The tribunal focused on the statutory time limit under Section 144C(13) for passing assessment orders after DRP directions, treated the order as barred by limitation and therefore did not adjudicate substantive transfer pricing challenges raised under Section 92CA. Consequently, technical disputes over comparability, exclusion/inclusion of comparables, and the profit level indicator computation were left unexamined.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Capitalization of interest: tribunal scrutinised whether interest and forex on capital projects form capital cost or permit revenue deduction.
    The tribunal analyzed four core taxation questions: whether interest and foreign exchange fluctuations written off from Capital Work in Progress are capital or revenue in nature and their nexus to business operations; whether write off of a DG set component should be treated within the block of assets for depreciation or as a revenue repair; the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) to proportionate interest on interest free advances to related concerns and the presumption from mixed funds; and the evidentiary requirements to establish that inter corporate deposits were funded from own funds rather than borrowed monies for interest deduction purposes.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of merger limits revisional jurisdiction under appeals, preventing collateral review of identical legal issues.
    The Doctrine of Merger operates to treat legal issues from an assessment as merged into appeal proceedings before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), thereby constraining subsequent revisional jurisdiction over those same issues; applied where initial assessment, reassessment notices and search-related assessment steps overlap, and supported by judicial precedent limiting collateral revision.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Interest on delayed tax refunds where delay is not attributable to the taxpayer under Section 244A.
    Entitlement to interest under Section 244A arises when refund payment is delayed for reasons not attributable to the assessee. The petitioner, a foreign company, faced delays caused by technical issues and incorrect guidance regarding banking details; the court treated the delay as the respondents' responsibility and applied Section 244A to award interest for the period of delay, directing payment according to the statutory rate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision application under Section 264: remand for fresh merits review when alternative remedies were improperly relied upon.
    Whether a revision under Section 264 may be denied solely because alternative remedies existed and whether appeal provisions applied to DDT-related treaty claims; the court found that rejecting revision on the mere availability of other remedies was untenable and that the appealed provision was inapplicable, directing fresh merits consideration of treaty relief and related tax computation by the Principal Commissioner.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    DTAA interpretation clarifies capital gains tax treatment for cross-border share sales under residency and grandfathering conditions.
    Taxation of capital gains from a Mauritius-based entity's sale of Indian company shares is analysed against the India-Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, focusing on DTAA allocation of taxing rights, timing of acquisition and transfer, and applicability of grandfathering provisions. The Tribunal assessed tax residency and treaty entitlement by examining corporate structure and commercial substance, applying the substance over form principle to determine whether treaty benefits were appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Fiduciary funds not treated as taxable income when entity acts as facilitator; earmarked project funds excluded from income.
    The Tribunal examined whether earmarked receipts should be included in taxable income or treated on the balance sheet, focusing on jurisdictional validity of scrutiny notices, whether amounts were routed through the income and expenditure account or retained as earmarked funds, and whether receipts held in a fiduciary capacity for disaster relief were excluded from the entity's income because the entity acted only as facilitator without beneficial ownership.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    ESOP deduction in revised returns - tribunal permits claim within revision window, stressing valuation, timing and documentary consistency.
    Deductibility of ESOP-related costs in a revised return hinges on compliance with the statutory time limit for revision and on accounting and evidentiary consistency: correct year of recognition, reliable grant date valuation (e.g., Black Scholes), concordant employee records, and disclosure in audited accounts. The tribunal found the claim allowable within the revision window but emphasised documentary proof, valuation method and timing of liability as central to acceptability.

    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 38 "Certain sums deemed as profits and gains of business or profession" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      21 August, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 38 Certain sums deemed as profits and gains of business or profession.

      Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed]

      At a Glance

      Document considered: Clause 38 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (hereafter "Old Version"). This commentary analyses Clause 38 as presented in the Bill (Old Version) and, where relevant, highlights differences introduced in Section 38 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 [As Passed] (hereafter "As Passed"). The provision determines particular receipts that will be deemed profits and gains of business or profession and thus taxable; it primarily affects taxpayers carrying on business or profession, successor entities on reorganisation, and tax administration. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause 38 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version addresses "profits and gains of business or profession" and sets out specific categories of receipts to be treated as income for tax purposes. The Old Version enumerates paragraphs (a)-(e) describing receipts that will be taxable, conditions in sub-section (2), set-off mechanism in sub-section (3), treatment for successor in business in sub-section (4), applicability where business ceased in sub-section (5), and definitions in sub-section (6).

      Definitions/explanations provided in the Old Version: "sold" (includes transfer by exchange or compulsory acquisition but excludes certain amalgamation transfers); "successor in business" (lists amalgamated company, resulting company on demerger, any other person succeeding the assessee, and succeeding firm). No further definitions (for example, of "scrap value" or specific computation terms) are provided in the Old Version.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The Old Version (Clause 38) applies to specified receipts deemed to be profits and gains of business or profession and chargeable to income-tax. The categories (sub-section (1)) are:

      • (a) Recapture where an allowance/deduction was earlier allowed for a trading liability, loss or expenditure: (i) value of benefit from cessation or remission of the trading liability (including unilateral write-off in accounts) in the year benefit accrues; or (ii) any amount obtained (cash or otherwise) in respect of such loss or expenditure in the year obtained - whether the business/profession continues or not.
      • (b) On sale/discard/demolition/destruction of a tangible asset owned by the assessee where money payable plus scrap value [A] exceeds written down value [C]: computation in the year money becomes due - if money plus scrap value [A] is less than actual cost [B], then [A] - [C]; otherwise [B] - [C].
      • (c) On sale of an asset representing capital expenditure on scientific research (referred to in section 45(1)(a) or (c)) sold without having been used for other purposes, where sale proceeds plus total deductions allowed under that section exceed the capital expenditure - the excess or the amount of deduction so made, whichever is less, in the year asset sold.
      • (d) Where a deduction for a bad debt (or part) u/s 31(2) was allowed and any subsequent recovery exceeds the difference between such debt and the amount allowed - the excess in the year of recovery.
      • (e) Where a deduction was allowed for any special reserve u/s 32(e), any amount subsequently withdrawn from such reserve in the year of withdrawal.

      Sub-section (2) sets conditions for applicability: (a) applicability for (1)(a) only when allowance/deduction has been made in assessment for any earlier tax year towards the trading liability/loss/expenditure incurred; (b) for (1)(b) only when asset was used for business purpose and depreciation claimed and allowed u/s 33; (c) for (1)(c) only when assets have not been used for other purposes.

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent indicated by the text: the provision is one of recapture/anti-avoidance - to tax receipts that reverse or offset earlier deductions or allowances made by the taxpayer in computing business/professional income. The text signals a principle of matching tax consequences to economic reversal of earlier tax advantages. Specific interpretive principles: recapture is triggered where benefit accrues or amount is obtained; amount and timing are tied to year of accrual/receipt; particular treatment for successor entities and ceased businesses is provided.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs/conditions are limited to the conditions in sub-section (2) (as summarised above). No further exceptions or monetary thresholds are provided in the Old Version. Provisos such as exclusions on amalgamation transfers in sub-section (6)(a) are included for the meaning of "sold".

      Illustrations

      • Example 1 (recapture on remission): A trader claimed and was allowed a deduction for a trading liability in year Y. In year Y+2 the creditor unilaterally writes off the liability in the trader's accounts and the trader enjoys a benefit by cessation of liability. Under clause 38(1)(a)(i), the value of that benefit is deemed business income in Y+2. (No numerical illustration given in the document.)
      • Example 2 (asset sale recapture): A tangible asset with actual cost [B], written down value [C], and scrap value [A] is sold in year Z. If money payable plus scrap value [A] exceeds [C], compute deemed income as [A] - [C] where [A] < [B], else [B] - [C], in year when money becomes due. (No numeric amounts provided in the document.)

      Interplay

      Interactions with other provisions: the Old Version expressly cross-references section 31(2) (bad debts), section 32(e) (special reserve), section 33 (depreciation), and section 45(1)(a) or (c) (capital nature expenditure on scientific research). No Rules, Notifications, or Circulars are mentioned in the Old Version. Further statutory cross-references are limited to the meanings given in sub-section (6). Any additional interplay with other provisions or tax code mechanisms is Not stated in the document.

      Differences between Old Version (Clause 38 of the Bill, 2025 - Old Version) and As Passed (Section 38 of Income-tax Act, 2025):

      • Reference to section 33(12)(a)(i): As Passed, clause (b) explicitly cross-references "tangible asset [as referred to in section 33(12)(a)(i)]" and refers to "written down value of such assets [C]" and "scrap value [A]". Old Version uses a generic "tangible asset" and references "depreciation ... u/s 33" without the subsection citation.
        • Practical impact: As Passed narrows or clarifies the class of tangible assets contemplated (by specific cross-reference) and formalises terminology for components of the computation; this could affect whether certain assets qualify for the deemed income computation.
      • Sub-section (1)(c) research-asset cross-reference: Old Version refers to "section 45(1)(a) or (c)". As Passed refers to "section 45(1)(a)(i)".
        • Practical impact: Change of cross-reference narrows or alters the category of scientific research capital assets caught; may change which research assets are covered when sold.
      • Sub-section (2)(a) temporal wording: Old Version: deduction/allowance "has been made in assessment for any earlier tax year"; As Passed: "when an allowance or deduction has been made in assessment for any tax year towards the trading liability, loss or expenditure incurred".
        • Practical impact: As Passed removes the explicit "earlier" qualifier and expands wording to "any tax year" (but retains concept of allowance in assessment); this could broaden scope to include allowances in the same or earlier years (interpretation depends on other provisions), potentially increasing situations where recapture applies.
      • Sub-section (2)(b) condition: Old Version requires asset "has been used for the purpose of business, and depreciation has been claimed and allowed thereon u/s 33". As Passed requires use "for the purpose of business or profession, and depreciation has been claimed and allowed thereon u/s 33(2)".
        • Practical impact: As Passed explicitly includes "profession" (not only business) and cites section 33(2) specifically; a clarified narrower cross-reference may affect applicability where depreciation is governed by that subsection.
      • Sub-section (6)(b) wording for "successor in business": Old Version states '"successor in business" means and includes--' and lists items (ii)-(iv). As Passed states '"successor in business" means--' and lists similar items but omits the phrase "and includes" (minor drafting difference) and removes the word "includes".
        • Practical impact: Largely drafting; potential interpretive effect about whether the list is exhaustive versus illustrative - As Passed more strongly reads as exhaustive.
      • Minor drafting and numerical/cross-reference adjustments appear throughout (e.g., precise subsection citations for section 33 and section 45).
        • Practical impact: Clarificatory drafting may affect scope and interpretation; where As Passed provides a specific cross-reference it is likely more restrictive and precise than the Old Version.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas grounded in the text: taxpayers who have claimed deductions/allowances for liabilities, bad debts, reserves, depreciation or scientific-research capital expenditures must monitor subsequent recoveries, remissions, sales or withdrawals, since such amounts may be taxable when the benefit accrues or proceeds are received.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points suggested by the text: maintain contemporaneous records proving (i) assessment files showing the earlier allowance/deduction; (ii) dates and values of recoveries, write-offs, or remission; (iii) asset accounts showing cost, written down value, scrap value and depreciation claimed and allowed u/s 33; (iv) documentation for special reserves and withdrawals; and (v) documentation of successor-in-business transfers. These records are essential to determine timing and quantum of deemed income under the clause.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 38 of the Bill (Old Version) is a recapture provision taxing receipts that reverse earlier deductions/allowances in computing business/professional income.
      • It covers remission/cessation of liabilities (including unilateral write-offs), recoveries of previously deducted losses/expenditure, gains on disposal of tangible assets exceeding written down value, recoveries of bad debts, and withdrawals from specified reserves.
      • Conditions for applicability hinge on earlier allowance in assessment (for liabilities), prior use and depreciation claim for assets, and non-use for other purposes for research assets.
      • Successor entities on amalgamation/demerger or other succession are explicitly within scope for treating such receipts as the successor's income.
      • Differences between the Old Version and As Passed mainly reflect more specific cross-references, inclusion of "profession" in certain places, and tighter drafting that can narrow or clarify scope - these drafting changes may materially affect applicability in edge cases.

      Full Text:

      Section 38 Certain sums deemed as profits and gains of business or profession.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax