Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsService Tax
    Navigating the Taxation Labyrinth: The Supreme Court's Guidance on Transfer of Right to Use Goods
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Earnest-Money Deposits under SARFAESI Rules
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    The Generality vs. Enumeration Principle: A Key to Interpreting Delegated Rule-Making Power: Validit...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Ensuring Fair Procedure before declaring Fraud in Bank Loan: Providing Relevant Documents and Opport...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
    Decoding the Judgement: Navigating the Complexities of ITC Eligibility under the GST Regime
    Excess stock found during survey: Navigating the Intricacies of UPGST / CGST Act and Invoking Wrong ...
    Striking a Balance: Judicial Interpretation of GST Provisions on Record-Keeping and Penalties
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Orders and the Limits of Article 142: Safeguarding Natural Justice Balancing Judicial Powers...
    Upholding Fairness and Transparency in Insolvency Resolution: A Landmark Judgment on the IBC
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Clarifies Vicarious Liability of Directors in Cheque Dishonour Cases
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Compensation in Cheque Dishonor Cases: Discretion and Due Process, Scope of the word "May"
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Principles of Delay Condonation: A Comprehensive Analysis by the Supreme Court
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
    Case LawsCustoms
    Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals: Analyzing the CESTAT Judgment on Binding Nature of CBIC Instruct...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
❯❯
MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder

No Folders have been created

    +

    Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

    NOTE:

    Notes
    Showing Results for :
    Reset Filters
    Results Found:
    Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    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 LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer of right to use goods: contracts retaining operational control are service arrangements, not deemed sales under VAT.
    The issue is whether supply agreements for cranes, trailers and tank trucks amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the deemed sale provision. Applying the five BSNL tests-availability of goods, consensus on identity, transferee's legal right to use, exclusivity of use, and non transferability by owner-the contracts failed to meet the criteria. Contractors retained possession, crew, fuel, maintenance and liability, and transferees had only permissive use without effective control, so the arrangements were services, not deemed sales under VAT/sales tax.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Forfeiture of earnest-money deposits under SARFAESI rules stands as a statutory consequence, limiting equitable intervention.
    The analysis affirms that Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Rules prescribes an express statutory forfeiture of earnest-money deposits arising from auction terms, and that Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, addressing contractual damages, do not apply to such statutory forfeitures. Unjust enrichment and equitable considerations cannot supplant a clear statutory forfeiture, and subsequent recovery by the secured creditor does not negate the forfeiture, except in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances where equity may justify relief.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Generality vs. enumeration principle affirms broad delegated rule making power, upholding rules that further an Act's statutory purposes.
    The Court held that Rule 9(3) is intra vires because the general delegated rule making power in section 29A(1) authorises rules that carry out the Act's purposes even when not covered by enumerated heads. Applying the generality vs. enumeration principle, the Court found the enumerated matters in section 29A(2) illustrative and not restrictive, and concluded Rule 9(3) furthers the misconduct chapter's object of maintaining ethical standards and preventing wrongful threshold dismissal of genuine complaints.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    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 LawsIncome Tax
    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 LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Right to be heard: affected parties must receive documents underlying fraud allegations and be allowed inspection and rebuttal.
    Classification of a loan account as fraud invokes the Principles of Natural Justice, requiring disclosure of the documents forming the basis of a Show Cause Notice and inspection access to bank and Resolution Professional records so the affected party can identify required documents, receive copies, and submit a meaningful reply within specified timelines, with scope to request a personal hearing.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    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 LawsIncome Tax
    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 LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility clarified: refund for unutilised ITC limited to inverted duty where input goods tax exceeds output supplies.
    The court construes Section 54(3) narrowly: refund of unutilised ITC for inverted duty arises only where tax on input goods exceeds tax on output supplies. It upholds the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) and Section 16(4), confirms that ITC is subject to legislatively prescribed conditions and time limits, and clarifies that the non-obstante clause in Section 16(2) does not override separate restrictions such as Section 16(4). Affected petitioners may invoke circulars and have eligible ITC claims processed where returns met the prescribed extended filing position.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Determination of tax on unaccounted stock must proceed under Sections 73 and 74, not Section 130.
    The Court held that tax determination for excess or unaccounted stock discovered in a survey must proceed under the statutory assessment procedures for undisclosed goods rather than by invoking the survey provision. The assessment code prescribes the exclusive mechanism for quantifying and demanding tax, and survey powers cannot be used to supplant the prescribed steps for computation, notice and imposition of tax or penalty on unaccounted goods.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Record-keeping obligations: failure attracts a capped statutory penalty and invalidates arbitrary confiscation without due process.
    The judgment emphasises that registered persons must maintain prescribed books and electronic records under Section 35 and related rules, and that any determination of tax on unaccounted goods must follow the show cause procedures for assessing tax liability. It finds that conditions for confiscation under Section 130 were not met and that penalties must be imposed in accordance with the statutory bifurcation in Section 122, with the offences in question attracting only the capped penalty, thereby underscoring procedural limits on enforcement powers.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Limits on Article 142: extraordinary power cannot automatically vacate interim stays; natural justice and supervisory jurisdiction must be preserved.
    Limits on the Supreme Court's extraordinary jurisdiction were defined to prevent blanket, time based vacation of interim stays; equitable power cannot deprive non parties of substantive benefits or negate the right to be heard. The Court confined vacation rules to cases where interim relief was granted without notice, instructed High Courts to grant limited ad interim relief, prioritise vacation applications, avoid routine time bound disposal directives, and recognised that past automatic vacations that led to concluded trials raise finality concerns while endorsing judicial superintendence and natural justice as constitutional constraints.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Insolvency plan compliance: failure to acknowledge creditor claims or secure approvals undermines approved resolution plans.
    The court held that a recall application grounded in lack of notice and alleged misrepresentation is maintainable under principles of natural justice. It found the resolution plan non-compliant with Section 30(2) read with Regulations 37 and 38-specifically for failing to acknowledge a creditor's claim, misrecording the payable amount, omitting secured creditor classification despite a charge, and proposing use of third-party statutory land without necessary approvals-deficiencies that materially affected the plan's transparency and treatment of creditor classes.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Vicarious liability of directors clarified: specific averments required to link a director to company affairs before liability attaches.
    The Court held that vicarious liability of a director in cheque dishonour cases cannot be invoked by merely reproducing statutory language or alleging directorship; complaints must contain specific factual averments showing how the director was responsible for or in charge of the company's day to day affairs to link the director to issuance or dishonour of negotiable instruments.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Interim compensation discretion: courts must prima facie assess claims and defences before ordering payment under Section 143A.
    The Court interpreted Section 143A(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act as conferring a discretionary power to order interim compensation, holding that the word "may" cannot be read as mandatory. Courts must prima facie assess the complainant's case and the accused's defence; the presumption under section 139 alone does not suffice. Interim compensation may be directed only when a prima facie case is established, with the quantum determined after considering transaction nature, parties' relationship, and the accused's paying capacity, and brief reasons must be recorded.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: courts require sufficient cause, balancing strict limitation rules with liberal remedial discretion.
    Principles of condonation of delay require balancing the Limitation Act's public policy against stale litigation: Section 3 is to be strictly interpreted while Section 5 is to be construed liberally to allow judicial discretion where sufficient cause is shown. Discretion remains limited by considerations such as inordinate delay, negligence, and lack of due diligence, and prior decisions granting condonation do not automatically justify relief unless the factual matrices are substantially similar.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    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 LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Binding nature of departmental instructions vs natural justice: tribunals may prioritize procedural fairness over monetary thresholds.
    The CESTAT held that CBIC instructions bind departmental officers but do not bind courts and tribunals, which must safeguard natural justice. The Tribunal found the appellate order defective for failing to remit valuation reassessment to the proper officer as statutorily required, treated related Bills of Entry as a single transaction for monetary limit calculation, and invoked its procedural power to hear departmental appeals on merits despite the Board's monetary threshold.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    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.

    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 53 "Full value of consideration for transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      28 August, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 53 Full value of consideration for transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The document is Clause 53 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version), prescribing deeming provisions for the "full value of consideration" where transfer of assets other than capital assets (specifically land or building or both) is at a value below the stamp duty value. It matters because it changes the taxable measure for profits and gains of business or profession where undervaluation vis-`a-vis stamp duty arises. The provision affects taxpayers engaged in sale/transfer of land and buildings, tax authorities assessing business income, and industries dealing in real estate. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 53, Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version), addressing "Full value of consideration for transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases" under the head "Profits and gains of business or profession." The provision applies to transfers of assets other than capital assets where the asset in question is land or building or both. The clause sets out rules to deem the stamp duty value as the full value of consideration for computing profits and gains where the consideration received or accrued is less than the stamp duty value.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The clause contains five sub-sections:

      • Sub-section (1): If consideration received or accrued for transfer of an asset (other than a capital asset) being land or building or both is less than the stamp duty, the stamp duty value shall be deemed to be the full value of consideration for computing profits and gains from transfer of such asset.

      • Sub-section (2): Sub-section (1) does not apply if the stamp duty value does not exceed 110% of the consideration received or accrued; in that case, the actual consideration received or accrued shall be deemed to be the full value of consideration.

      • Sub-section (3): Where the date of agreement fixing the value of consideration and the date of registration are different, the stamp duty value as on the date of agreement may be taken as the full value of consideration under sub-section (1).

      • Sub-section (4): Sub-section (3) applies only where the amount of consideration or part thereof has been received by specified banking or online mode on or before the date of agreement.

      • Sub-section (5): For determination of the value adopted or assessed or assessable under sub-section (1), the provisions of section 78(2) and (4) shall apply.

      Coverage is limited to non-capital assets, specifically land and/or buildings. The clause does not define "stamp duty" or "stamp duty value" within the text provided. It does not specify procedures for valuation beyond cross-reference to section 78(2) and (4).

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent as discernible from the text: the legislature aims to prevent understatement of consideration in transactions of land/buildings by enabling tax computation to adopt the stamp duty valuation where declared consideration is lower than stamp duty benchmarks. The 110% threshold in sub-section (2) establishes a tolerance band where small variances do not trigger deeming. Sub-sections (3) and (4) indicate a deliberate rule allowing stamp duty value as on agreement date to be used-subject to actual receipt of consideration (or part) through specified banking/online modes-thereby linking electronic/payment evidence to the ability to rely on agreement-date stamp valuation.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs and conditions are set out:

      • The deeming in sub-section (1) is not operative where stamp duty value <= 110% of consideration received/accrued (sub-section (2)).
      • Use of stamp duty value as of agreement date is permitted only when the agreement date differs from registration date (sub-section (3)), and only where consideration or part of it has been received by specified banking/online mode on or before agreement date (sub-section (4)).
      • Determination of the value for adoption under sub-section (1) is governed by section 78(2) and (4) (sub-section (5)).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A taxpayer transfers a plot of land in the course of business. Consideration received is Rs. 90 lakh. Stamp duty value recorded is Rs. 1.2 crore. Under sub-section (1), because consideration < stamp duty, stamp duty value (Rs. 1.2 crore) is deemed full value of consideration for computing profits, unless barred by sub-section (2). Apply sub-section (2): stamp duty value (Rs.1.2 crore) exceeds 110% of consideration (110% of 90 lakh = 99 lakh). Hence deeming applies and Rs.1.2 crore is treated as full value. (This illustration is a hypothetical calculation consistent with the text.)
      • Example 2: Consideration Rs. 95 lakh; stamp duty value Rs. 1.02 crore. 110% of consideration = Rs. 1.045 crore. Since stamp duty value (Rs. 1.02 crore) does not exceed 110% of consideration, sub-section (2) applies and actual consideration (Rs. 95 lakh) is deemed full value. (Hypothetical calculation consistent with the text.)
      • Example 3: Agreement dated 1 Jan; registration 1 Mar. Stamp duty value as on agreement date is Rs. X. If part of consideration was paid through specified banking/online mode on or before 1 Jan, then per sub-sections (3) and (4) stamp duty value as on agreement date may be taken as full value under sub-section (1). (Hypothetical consistent with the text.)

      Interplay

      Sub-section (5) expressly incorporates the provisions of section 78(2) and (4) for determination of the value "adopted or assessed or assessable" under sub-section (1). The text does not reproduce section 78; therefore, the mechanics and criteria in section 78 are not stated in the document. Not stated in the document: whether other provisions, rules, notifications, or circulars interact with Clause 53, or any transitional arrangements.

      Differences Between Clause 53 (Old Bill) and Section 53 (Act, 2025) and Practical Impact

      TopicClause 53 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version)Section 53 of the Income-tax Act, 2025
      Text of sub-section (1)Deems stamp duty value as full value where consideration received or accrued is less than the stamp duty.Deems stamp duty value as full value where consideration received or accrued is less than the stamp duty value.
      Sub-section (2) - 110% thresholdSame: carve-out where stamp duty value does not exceed 110% of consideration; actual consideration deemed full value.Same language and effect.
      Sub-section (3) - agreement vs registration dateStamp duty value as on date of agreement may be taken as full value where dates differ.Same: allows stamp duty value as on agreement date to be taken as full value.
      Sub-section (4) - payment mode conditionApplies only where amount or part is received by specified banking/online mode on or before date of agreement.Same condition in substance: amount or part received by specified banking/online mode on or before agreement date required.
      Sub-section (5) - cross-reference to section 78Refers to "section 78(2) and (4)" for determination of value adopted/assessed/assessable under sub-section (1).Refers to "section 78(2) and (3)" for determination of the stamp duty value under sub-section (1).

      Practical impact of the difference: The only textual difference in the two versions provided concerns the cross-reference in sub-section (5). The Bill's old version cross-references section 78(2) and (4), whereas the enacted Section 53 cross-references section 78(2) and (3). The practical impact depends entirely on the substantive content of section 78(3) versus section 78(4)-which are not reproduced in the provided documents. Therefore, specific consequences cannot be ascertained from the text given. Not stated in the document: the substantive differences between section 78(3) and section 78(4), and how they affect valuation methodology or procedural outcomes. In consequence, the only observable immediate effect is that the enacted text narrows or alters the cross-referential provisions that govern determination of stamp duty value compared with the Bill; the precise legal and practical significance of that alteration is not stated in the document.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers selling/transfering land/buildings in the course of business must be aware that declared consideration below stamp duty value may be ignored and stamp duty value adopted for profit computation, increasing taxable income. Reliance on the 110% tolerance is critical where stamp duty value is close to consideration; precise calculation is necessary to determine applicability.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: Sub-section (4) conditions use of agreement-date stamp duty value on proof of receipt (in part or whole) by specified banking/online modes on or before the agreement date-thus documentary evidence of payments and their mode, as well as dating of receipts and agreements, will be relevant. The clause implicitly places evidential importance on banking/online payment records and dated agreements.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 53 deems stamp duty value to be full value of consideration for non-capital land/building transfers where declared consideration is lower than stamp duty value (sub-section (1)).
      • A safeguard exists: if stamp duty value does not exceed 110% of declared consideration, the actual consideration stands as full value (sub-section (2)).
      • Where agreement and registration dates differ, stamp duty value as on agreement date may be used, but only if payment (or part) was received by specified banking/online mode on or before agreement date (sub-sections (3)-(4)).
      • The method for determining the value for adoption refers to section 78(2) and (4); the clause does not state the content of those provisions (sub-section (5)).
      • Documentary proof of payment modes and dated agreements will be important for taxpayers wishing to rely on agreement-date valuations.
      • The clause applies to non-capital assets only, limited to land and/or buildings; it does not address transfers of capital assets within this text.
      • Not stated in the document: effective date, transitional rules, administrative procedures, and detailed interaction with other statutory provisions beyond section 78(2) and (4).

      Full Text:

      Section 53 Full value of consideration for transfer of assets other than capital assets in certain cases.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax