Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 TMI Notes - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

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

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • Benami Property
  • Bill
  • Central Excise
  • Companies Law
  • Customs
  • DGFT
  • FEMA
  • GST
  • GST - States
  • IBC
  • Income Tax
  • Indian Laws
  • Money Laundering
  • SEBI
  • SEZ
  • Service Tax
  • VAT / Sales Tax
Types:
---- All Types ----
  • ---- All Types ----
  • Act Rules
  • Case Laws
  • Circulars
  • Manuals
  • News
  • Notifications
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
    Evolution of Executive Scheme-Making Powers in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 532 of the Income Tax ...
    Withdrawal of Statutory Approvals under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 529 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    Legal Perspectives on Condonation of Delay in Income Tax Approvals : Clause 528 of Income Tax Bill, ...
    Executive Discretion and Tax Incentives in India's Mineral Oil Sector : Clause 527 of the Income Tax...
    Immunity and Jurisdictional Bar in Tax Administration : Clause 526 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Authorisation and Assessment in Multi-Person Search Cases : Clause 525 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 ...
    Rebuttable Presumptions in Tax Searches : Clause 524 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292C o...
    Deeming Service of Notice in Tax Proceedings Under Income Tax Law : Clause 523 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice : Clause 522 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 292B of...
    Exclusion of Probationary Relief for Tax Offenders : Clause 521 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sec...
    Jurisdictional Thresholds for Tax Offence Trials : Clause 520 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Secti...
    Immunity from Prosecution under Income Tax Law : Clause 519 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section...
    Practical Impact of Indemnity Provisions in Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Legal Mandate for Receipts in Indian Tax Law : Clause 517 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 2...
    Evolution of Rounding Off Provisions regarding tax payable in Indian Tax Law : Clause 516 of the Inc...
    Legal Framework of Rounding Off Total Income in India tax Law : Clause 516 of the Income Tax Bill, 2...
    The Right of Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 515 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Analysis of Registered Valuer Representation in Income Tax Proceedings : Clause 513 of the Income Ta...
    Public Disclosure of Tax Offenders : Clause 512 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 287 of the ...
    Legal Framework for International Group Reporting : Clause 511 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Power to frame schemes expands executive authority to enable faceless, technology-driven tax administration and modify statutory application.
    Clause 532 grants the Central Government authority to make schemes for any purpose of the Act to enhance efficiency, transparency and accountability by eliminating taxpayer interface and optimising resources, and to issue notifications modifying the application of any provision of the Act to give effect to such schemes; it also permits amendment of schemes under the Income-tax Act, 1961 and requires that notifications be laid before each House of Parliament.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Withdrawal of approvals: authorities may rescind statutory tax approvals after recording reasons and giving a fair hearing.
    Clause 529 authorises the Central Government, the Board, or income-tax authorities to withdraw any approval under the Act at any time after recording reasons and giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard, even if the enabling provision lacks an express withdrawal clause. The provision mandates recorded reasons and a hearing but leaves "approval" undefined, does not specify substantive grounds for withdrawal, and does not prescribe a limitation period, which may raise uncertainty and prompt judicial scrutiny of procedural adequacy.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: authority may excuse late tax approvals for sufficient cause, subject to discretionary review and safeguards.
    Clause 528 permits the Central Government or the Board to condone delays in obtaining approvals required before a specified date under the Act for "sufficient cause," vesting discretionary power in the same authority to excuse late applications across a broad range of approvals while leaving "sufficient cause," procedural steps, time limits and appeal mechanisms undefined.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Executive discretion in tax exemptions for mineral oil sector enables tailored fiscal relief to investors and service providers.
    Clause 527 vests the Central Government with discretionary power to grant exemptions, reductions or other modifications in income tax for persons engaged in prospecting, extraction or production of mineral oils, including operators, service providers, suppliers and their employees; notifications must be laid before Parliament and key terms like "mineral oil" and "status" are defined or cross referenced in the Bill.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Bar on civil suits prevents civil court challenges to tax proceedings, preserving exclusive statutory remedies and good faith immunity.
    The provision bars any civil suit to set aside or modify "any proceeding taken or order made" under the Act and grants immunity to the Government and its officers for acts done or intended to be done in good faith, channeling challenges to the statutory appellate and revisionary framework while preserving writ review for ultra vires, mala fide, or constitutional breaches.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Authorisation for multi-person searches: single authorisations allowed, but assessments must be made separately for each person.
    Clause 525 permits a single search or requisition authorisation to name multiple persons without requiring separate instruments, and provides that such joint naming does not, by itself, constitute authorisation against an AOP or BOI. Notwithstanding a consolidated authorisation, assessment or reassessment must be made separately in the name of each person mentioned, preserving individualized tax liability determinations while allowing administrative consolidation of search procedures.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rebuttable presumption in tax searches shifts evidentiary burden to taxpayers and explicitly covers virtual digital assets.
    Clause 524 establishes a rebuttable presumption that items found in search or survey-books, documents, money, bullion, jewellery, other valuables and virtual digital assets-belong to the person in whose possession they were found; that contents of books and documents are true; that signatures and handwriting are authentic; and that stamped, executed or attested documents were duly executed, with identical presumptions applying to items requisitioned to officers as if discovered in a search.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Deeming validity of notice: participation or cooperation bars later objections unless raised before assessment completion.
    Clause 523 creates a deeming fiction that an assessee's appearance in proceedings or co-operation in an inquiry shall be treated as valid and timely service of any statutory notice, and it precludes the assessee from later objecting that the notice was not served, not timely served, or served improperly; however, this preclusion does not apply where the assessee raises the objection before completion of the assessment or reassessment.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Substantial compliance preserves tax proceedings despite minor procedural errors when the instrument fulfils legislative intent.
    Clause 522 preserves the validity of returns, assessments, notices, summonses and other proceedings despite clerical, typographical or similar procedural defects, provided the document or action is in substance and effect in conformity with the intent and purposes of the Act; it does not cure defects that go to jurisdiction, authority, limitation, or breaches of natural justice, and mirrors Section 292B to maintain continuity of judicial interpretation and application.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of probationary relief bars adult tax offenders from probationary provisions, preserving minors' exception and updating criminal code reference.
    The clause mandates that the Probation of Offenders Act and the analogous provision in the new criminal procedure code shall not apply to persons convicted under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, except for those under eighteen, thereby removing judicial discretion for adult tax offenders, updating statutory references, and preserving a minors' exception while raising procedural questions on age determination and scope.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional threshold: income tax offences must be tried by a Judicial Magistrate of the first class, altering forum nomenclature.
    Clause 520 mandates that no court inferior to a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, creating a uniform jurisdictional threshold for all tax offences. The provision modernizes terminology compared with Section 292 of the 1961 Act by omitting presidency magistrates, aligning with the CrPC framework and metropolitan magistrates' equivalence, while leaving potential ambiguities about special statute courts and transitional application. Its practical effect is to require complaints be filed before competent magistrates and to enable jurisdictional challenges where proceedings are instituted in inferior forums.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Immunity from prosecution: conditional grants require full and true disclosure and are revocable if falsehood or concealment is found.
    Immunity from prosecution allows the Central Government to grant discretionary, conditional immunity to persons concerned in concealment of income or tax evasion in exchange for a full and true disclosure, with written reasons required for the grant; acceptance limits prosecution and penalty to the scope specified, while failure to fully comply permits the government to record a finding and withdraw immunity, rendering the person liable to trial and penalty as if immunity had never been granted.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Indemnity for withholding agents protects deductors from civil claims when acting lawfully under the tax statute.
    Clause 518 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 provides a statutory indemnity for persons who deduct, retain, or pay tax in pursuance of the tax statute in respect of income belonging to another person, serving as a defence against civil claims by the income recipient where the agent acts lawfully; the protection is conditional on actions being within the scope of the statute and leaves unresolved issues about consequential losses, claim procedures, and interaction with other legal remedies.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Receipt obligation: mandatory issuance of receipts for any tax money paid or recovered, securing payment evidence and taxpayer protection.
    The provision mandates that a receipt shall be given for any money paid or recovered under the Income Tax Bill, 2025, covering voluntary payments and enforced recoveries under the Act. The clause is mandatory but silent on form, content, timing, issuing authority, mode of delivery, and consequences for non-issuance; subordinated rules and administrative practice-including electronic acknowledgments-are expected to fill these operational gaps. The receipt serves as an acknowledgement and evidentiary record rather than an automatic discharge of liability.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding off rules: ignore paise then round to nearest ten rupees, making the rounded figure legally operative.
    The provision applies rounding to computed total income and to amounts payable or refundable by first ignoring paise and then rounding the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten rupees-rounding up where the units digit is five or more and rounding down where it is less than five-and declares the rounded amount to be the deemed operative total income or amount payable or refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rounding of tax amounts: unified rule mandates nearest multiple rounding for total income, payable and refundable amounts.
    Clause 516 prescribes a mandatory two-step rounding mechanism: ignore any paise, then round the rupee amount to the nearest multiple of ten-rounding up if the last digit is five or more and down if less than five-and deems the rounded figure to be the amount of total income, amount payable, or amount refundable for all purposes under the Act.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Right of representation: statutory authorisation and disqualification framework balancing access to representation with safeguards.
    The statute permits an assessee to appear by an authorised representative across all proceedings while preserving mandatory personal attendance for oath examination; it defines eligible representatives (including professionals, bank officers, relatives, legacy practitioners and any persons as prescribed), enumerates exhaustive exclusions and disqualifications to prevent conflicts of interest, distinguishes disciplinary regimes for professionals and nonprofessionals (with Rule 52 designating prescribed tax authorities to disqualify nonprofessionals), and mandates procedural safeguards including a hearing and appeal mechanism, while carrying forward prior disqualifications.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Registered valuer representation enables technical valuation expertise in tax proceedings, subject to personal-examination exception and updated registration framework.
    Clause 513 grants an assessee the discretionary right to attend valuation-related proceedings before income-tax authorities or the Appellate Tribunal through a "registered valuer," excludes cases where personal attendance is required for examination on oath or affirmation, and defines "registered valuer" by reference to section 514 of the Bill, thereby creating a self-contained regime that modernizes registration, oversight, and professional standards for valuers.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Public disclosure of tax offenders can deter non-compliance while imposing reputational consequences under discretionary publication powers.
    Clause 512 empowers the Central Government to publish names and particulars of assessees when it considers such publication necessary or expedient in the public interest, subject to a safeguard that penalty-related publication await exhaustion or non-pursuit of appellate remedies, and permits publication of partners, directors and other associated persons if circumstances justify it. The clause modernises language and cross-references from Section 287 of the 1961 Act while preserving substantive continuity, raising interpretive concerns about the breadth of "particulars" and the subjectivity of "public interest."
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Country-by-Country reporting requires multinational groups to submit consolidated jurisdictional tax and economic data for risk assessment.
    Clause 511 mandates Country-by-Country (CbC) reporting by parent entities or alternate reporting entities resident in India and requires Indian constituent entities to notify the tax authority of the parent or ARE. It prescribes report contents-aggregate jurisdictional financial and economic indicators, constituent identification, and business activities-provides a secondary filing route where the parent's jurisdiction lacks filing or exchange, allows designation of a single Indian filer, sets a revenue threshold for applicability, and grants verification powers to the authority, with procedural details to be prescribed.

    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 73 "Cost with reference to certain modes of acquisition" between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      29 August, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 73 Cost with reference to certain modes of acquisition.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Document: Clause 73 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version). It sets out deemed cost-of-acquisition rules for specified modes of acquisition of capital assets. The provision affects taxpayers (transferors/transferees, companies, mutual funds, trusts), and tax administration in determining capital gains. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 73 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The clause prescribes deemed cost of acquisition for capital assets that become the property of an assessee by various modes (gift, succession, liquidation distribution, trust transfers, specified transfers u/s 70(1) variants, demerger, consolidation of mutual funds, conversion in LLP, etc.). The clause sets out a Table with 24 serial entries mapping specific acquisition scenarios (column B) to the deemed cost of acquisition (column C).

      Definitions/explanations within the clause: Sub-section (2) defines "previous owner of the property" for serial number 1; it adopts SEBI Circular definitions for "main portfolio", "segregated portfolio" and "total portfolio" for serial numbers 11 and 12; it defines "net worth" for serial numbers 14 and 15; and it provides that certain provisions (serial numbers 2, 14 and 15) shall, as far as may be, also apply to business reorganisation of a co-operative bank as referred to in section 65.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The clause covers multiple modes whereby an assessee acquires capital assets and specifies the deeming rule for cost of acquisition in each scenario. Core categories include acquisition by gift/will/succession/liquidation/trust, corporate reorganisations (amalgamation, demerger, exchanges under specific section 70(1) heads), mutual fund consolidations/segregations, conversion of LLP interests, redemption of GDRs, transfers involving Electronic Gold Receipts, units of business trusts, assets declared under the Income Declaration Scheme, assets where value was subject to transfer pricing u/s 92(2)(m), and assets of trusts/institutions where accreted income was computed u/s 352.

      Interpretation

      The clause adopts a principle of continuity of cost: when an asset passes to an assessee by specified non-purchase modes, the cost is generally the cost to the previous owner (often adjusted for improvements). For certain specified assets (e.g., amalgamation, demerger, segregated portfolios, consolidations), the clause prescribes formulaic apportionment or special rules to determine cost. For some categories (specified securities/sweat equity and assets declared under a prior disclosure scheme), fair market value is adopted as the relevant cost.

      Legislative intent suggested by text: to ensure tax neutrality in non-market transfers by preserving the prior owner's cost base (or substituting an objective market value where appropriate), and to provide clear mechanical rules for corporate reorganisations and fund restructurings. (Legislative history or policy rationale beyond the text: Not stated in the document.)

      Exceptions/Provisos

      No separate provisos are present beyond the Table and sub-section (2) clarifications. Specific carve-outs are embedded in entries (e.g., some entries only apply to shares of amalgamating companies, or to specified securities referred to in a particular section). Thresholds or monetary limits: Not stated in the document.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A person receives shares by inheritance (serial 1). Deemed cost = cost for which the previous owner acquired the shares, increased by cost of improvements incurred by either the previous owner or the assessee.
      • Example 2: A mutual fund segregates a portfolio (serial 11). The cost of acquisition of units in the segregated portfolio is computed using X = A x B / C where A = cost of acquisition of units in total portfolio; B = NAV of asset transferred to segregated portfolio; C = NAV of total portfolio immediately before segregation.
      • Example 3: Shares acquired by a non-resident on redemption of GDRs (serial 6). Deemed cost = price of the shares on a recognised stock exchange on the date of request for redemption.

      Interplay

      The clause expressly cross-references numerous other provisions (various heads of section 70(1), section 17(2), section 67(14), section 352, section 92(2)(m), section 26(2)(j), SEBI Circular No. SEBI/HO/IMD/DF2/CIR/P/2018/160). Interaction with those provisions is integral: the deemed cost outcomes depend on definitions and triggers in those sections and the SEBI circular. Other interactions (e.g., with capital gains indexing rules, cost inflation index, or exemptions) are Not stated in the document.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Reference to section on specified securities/sweat equity (Table entry 4): Bill (Clause 73) cites section 17(2); Act (Section 73) cites section 17(1)(d).
        • Practical impact: The amendment in the Act changes the statutory anchor for which category of specified securities or sweat equity shares the deemed cost rule applies. This can affect which instruments are valued at fair market value for cost purposes. (Precise reach of the change: Not stated in the document.)
      • Exclusion in entry regarding shares in a project (Table entry 20): Bill refers to "Capital asset, being share in the project, in the form of land or building, or both, u/s 67(14)"; Act adds the qualification "not being a capital asset referred to in section 67(16)".
        • Practical impact: The Act narrows the entry by excluding assets covered by section 67(16), thereby limiting the scope of the deemed cost rule under this entry. This reduces unintended coverage for assets specifically carved out by section 67(16). (Further detail: Not stated in the document.)
      • Provision for accreted income / fair market value reference (Table entry 21): Bill cites computation and tax paid as per section 352 and uses section 352(3) for the specified date; Act cites section 352 and uses section 352(2) for the specified date.
        • Practical impact: The Act shifts the cross-reference to a different sub-paragraph of section 352 for the relevant date when fair market value was considered for computation of accreted income. This may change the precise valuation date or procedural reference for trusts/institutions. (Exact date/implication: Not stated in the document.)
      • Formulation of formulae and minor drafting differences (Table entries 11 and 14): Bill expresses formulas as "X = A x B /C" and in entry 11 uses "immediately before segregation"; Act sets out formula in a two-line presentation "X = A x B / C" with explanatory punctuation and uses "immediately before segregation of portfolios" (slightly fuller wording).
        • Practical impact: These are drafting and clarity differences; the mathematical operation appears identical. The Act's fuller wording may reduce ambiguity about the temporal reference ("immediately before segregation of portfolios").
      • Wording differences in reduction language for original units/shares (Table entries 12 and 15): Bill uses shorter phrasing ("The cost of acquisition as reduced by..."; "As reduced by..."); Act uses fuller phrasing ("The cost of acquisition of such original units as reduced by..." and "The cost of acquisition of such original shares as reduced by...").
        • Practical impact: Primarily stylistic; the Act's phrasing is marginally clearer on subject of reduction being applied to the cost of acquisition of the original asset.
      • Cross-reference to cooperative bank business reorganisation (sub-section (2)(d)): Bill refers to section 65; Act refers to section 64.
        • Practical impact: The Act alters which section governs application "as far as may be" to co-operative bank reorganisations. This may change whether the listed rules apply to such reorganisations (scope depends on the substantive content of sections 64/65, which is Not stated in the document).
      • Minor wording elsewhere (e.g., serial 3 wording "in relation to which such asset is acquired by the assesse" in Act vs "for which such asset is acquired by the assesse" in Bill):
        • Practical impact: These are drafting refinements likely intended to improve grammatical clarity; they do not, on the face of the text, alter substantive effect.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers receiving assets by non-purchase modes must trace the previous owner's cost of acquisition (serial 1). Where assets arise from reorganisations, taxpayers and advisers must apply the prescribed formulae to apportion cost (serials 11, 14). For instruments where fair market value is prescribed (serials 4, 17, 18, 21, 22), appropriate documentation of valuation date and valuation method is necessary. The clause delegates some definitional matters (e.g., SEBI definitions), so reliance on external circulars is required.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points: Maintain purchase records of previous owners where available; documents substantiating improvements; NAV statements and contemporaneous valuation data for mutual fund reorganisations; stock exchange prices on specified dates (e.g., GDR redemption date); records of tax paid and valuation dates u/s 352; records of disclosure and payment under the Income Declaration Scheme, 2016 where invoked.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 73 prescribes deemed cost of acquisition rules for a wide range of non-market transfers and restructurings.
      • General rule: the prior owner's cost (plus improvements) is carried forward in most non-purchase acquisitions.
      • Specific categories (amalgamation, demerger, segregations, consolidations) require mechanical apportionment/formulae to determine cost.
      • Certain instruments/assets use fair market value or market price on a specified date as deemed cost.
      • The clause cross-references several statutory provisions and a SEBI circular; precise application depends on those external texts.
      • Taxpayers must preserve evidence of prior costs, improvements, NAVs, market prices and valuation dates to support cost calculations.
      • Where the Bill uses concise phrasing, careful reading with the cross-references is necessary to determine operative dates and definitions.

      Full Text:

      Section 73 Cost with reference to certain modes of acquisition.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax