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
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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 92 "Income from other sources." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      1 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 92 Income from other sources.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 92 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - (Old Version) sets out the head of income "Income from other sources" and itemises particular receipts chargeable under that head. It matters because it determines taxation of diverse receipts (dividends, winnings, gifts, insurance proceeds, etc.) and affects taxpayers across individuals, HUFs, business trusts and payers. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 92 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (F. - Income from other sources). The clause provides a non-exhaustive list of items chargeable under the head "Income from other sources" where such receipts are not chargeable under other specified heads (section 13(a)-(d) referenced). The provision contains definitions and exclusions to determine when particular receipts-dividends, gambling winnings, gifts, insurance proceeds, certain receipts by unit holders, compensation and interest-fall within this head. Specific definitions for terms such as "assessable", "card game and other game of any sort", "fair market value", "jewellery", "lottery", "property", "relative" and "unit linked insurance policy" are included. Any explanatory context beyond the clause text: Not stated in the document.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 92(1) establishes a residuary taxing head: any income not excluded from total income and not chargeable under the heads specified in section 13(a)-(d) is chargeable under "Income from other sources." Clause 92(2) supplies an illustrative (non-exhaustive) list including: dividends; winnings from lotteries, puzzles and games; employee contributions to welfare funds where not chargeable under business profits; Keyman insurance proceeds; interest on securities; hire income from plant/machinery/furniture (and, in specified circumstances, buildings); forfeited advances during failed negotiations to transfer capital assets; interest on compensation u/s 278(1); termination/modification payments from employment; specified sums distributed by a business trust computed via A-B-C; life insurance proceeds exceeding premium aggregate (subject to exclusions); and gifts / property received without or for inadequate consideration subject to thresholds and exceptions.

      Interpretation

      The clause signals legislative intent to: (a) consolidate miscellaneous incomes under a single head where no other head applies; (b) tax certain transfers and receipts with bright-line rules (e.g., gift thresholds, computation for business trust distributions); and (c) rely on cross-referenced definitions and valuation mechanisms (e.g., "stamp duty value", "fair market value", "specified banking or electronic modes" via other sections). The presence of detailed subclauses and defined terms indicates an intent to reduce ambiguity by specifying categories and valuation/payment mechanics. Interpretive principles indicated by the text: literal application of specified tests (thresholds, modes of payment, valuation dates) and deference to cross-references for technical definitions.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Key carve-outs and conditions include:

      • Life insurance receipts: unit linked policies and Keyman insurance receipts are excluded from clause (l) (treated separately); excess over aggregate premiums (not claimed as deduction) is taxable, "computed in such manner, as prescribed."
      • Gifts and property receipts: clause (2)(m) applies thresholds of Rs. 50,000 (fifty thousand rupees) for various types of gratuitous receipts and inadequate consideration; clause (3) lists exceptions where clause (2)(m) does not apply (gifts from relatives, on marriage, by will/inheritance, in contemplation of death, from local authorities, from registered non-profit organisations subject to specified limitations, certain non-transfer transactions u/s 70(1), trust-to-relative transactions and other prescribed classes/conditions).
      • Immovable property valuation for gifts: stamp duty value on the date of agreement applies if payment in prescribed modes occurred on or before the agreement date; disputed valuations may be referred to a Valuation Officer with sections 78(2) and 288 procedures applicable.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: An individual receives cash of Rs. 75,000 as a gratuitous gift from a non-relative. Under clause 92(2)(m)(i) the entire Rs. 75,000 is taxable as "Income from other sources" (subject to exceptions in clause (3) - none apply here).

      • Example 2: An employee receives termination compensation. Clause 92(2)(j) brings "any compensation or other payment ... in connection with the termination of his employment" under this head, unless chargeable under another head (Not stated in the document whether any specific exemption applies).

      • Example 3: A unit holder receives a distribution from a business trust. Compute specified sum = A - B - C; if negative, treated as zero; the resulting amount is taxable under this clause subject to exceptions for items characterised under Schedule V or section 223(2).

      Interplay

      The clause expressly interacts with multiple other provisions: section 13(a)-(d) (other heads), Schedule II (insurance tables), Schedule V, section 223(2) (tax treatment of certain distributions), section 278(1) (compensation interest), section 66(32) or equivalent (specified banking/online modes - Bill defines payment modes explicitly), section 70(1) (transactions not regarded as transfer), sections 78(2) and 288 (valuation procedures), section 355 (definition/conditions for non-profit organisations), and other undefined prescribed rules for valuation and computation. The clause therefore operates within a network of cross-references and delegated rules which determine practical tax consequences.

      Differences between Section 92 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and Clause 92 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - (Old Version)

      • The Act (Document 1) cross-references section numbers and Schedules differently from the Bill (Document 2). Examples: the Act in subsection (2)(d) refers to "Keyman insurance policy, as defined in Schedule II (Note 1)" (same wording), while the Bill uses "as defined Schedule II (Note 1)" (minor typographical omission). In subsection (5)(a) the Act defines "assessable" by reference to section 2(105); the Bill defines "assessable" by reference to section 78(3).
        • Practical impact: the Act's cross-reference to section 2(105) may change the meaning/coverage of "assessable" relative to the Bill; if the definitions in the cited sections differ, taxpayers and officers will apply different legal tests.
      • Payment modes wording for immovable property (subsection (4)(a)): The Bill specifies payment modes as "by account payee cheque or account payee bank draft or by electronic clearing system through a bank account or through any prescribed electronic mode." The Act replaces that formulation with the more general "specified banking or online mode as defined in section 66(32)".
        • Practical impact: the Act consolidates and standardises permitted modes by reference to a statutory definition (section 66(32)), which may expand or restrict acceptable payment modes compared with the Bill's enumerated list and will centralise future changes in the definition rather than amending section 92 each time.
      • Formatting and drafting differences in subsection (3)(f)/(g) proviso cross-references: The Bill's proviso (3)(f) refers to section 355(g) and excepts when received by any person referred to in section 355(i). The Act refers to section 355(g) and excepts when received by any person referred to in section 355(h).
        • Practical impact: if sections 355(h) and 355(i) denote different classes, the scope of the exemption for registered non-profit organisations will change; one must consult the final Act's section 355 to determine which persons remain taxable.
      • Subsection (3)(g) list of transactions not regarded as transfer: The Bill and Act list differing paragraph letters within section 70(1). The Bill's list order and letters differ (includes items in a different sequence and with some letters swapped).
        • Practical impact: divergent lists could alter which transactions qualify for the exclusion from clause (2)(m) treatment, affecting transfer characterization for specific transaction types. The precise practical effect depends on alignment of those lettered subclauses in section 70 in the final Act.
      • Definitions - minor wording and drafting changes: Differences appear in subsection (5)(c) where the Bill states "means the value determined in such method as prescribed" (drafting error) while the Act states "means the value determined by such method as may be prescribed" (clearer). Subsection (5)(e) (definition of "lottery") and (5)(f) (property list) are substantively identical, but the Act includes "virtual digital asset" as item (x) as does the Bill.
        • Practical impact: most are drafting clarifications; the Act's clearer language reduces interpretive ambiguity.
      • Scope of 'relative' definition (subsection (5)(g)): The Bill's clause (5)(g)(i)(E) says "any lineal ascendant or descendant (maternal as well as paternal)" and then repeats "maternal as well as paternal" elsewhere; the Act lists lineal ascendant/descendant and explicitly repeats the maternal/paternal qualifier in some items.
        • Practical impact: largely drafting differences; the Act appears intended to clarify inclusions, which reduces disputes on familial coverage for gifts/exemptions.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance hotspots: accurate identification of the head under which a receipt is taxable (e.g., business profits v. other sources v. salaries), documentation to prove payment modes for immovable property agreements, and adherence to thresholds for gifts/property to avoid unintended taxation.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: retain agreements, payment instrument records (account payee cheques/drafts, ECS or prescribed electronic mode confirmations), valuation reports or stamp duty valuation records, records of unit issue price and earlier taxed amounts (for business trust calculations), insurance policy premium history and proofs of deductions/non-deductions, and documents evidencing relationship (for "relative" exemptions) or inheritance/will.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 92 provides a broad residuary head to tax miscellaneous receipts not falling under other heads.
      • Specified bright-line rules apply to gifts, immovable property valuation, insurance proceeds and business trust distributions.
      • Multiple cross-references mean substantive effect depends on definitions and procedures in other sections and Schedules.
      • Taxpayers should preserve payment evidence and valuation records to meet prescribed modes and thresholds.
      • Several exceptions (relatives, marriage, inheritance, registered non-profits, specified transactions) narrow the scope of gift taxation.
      • Detailed computation rules (e.g., A-B-C for business trusts) require tracking historical distributions and earlier taxed amounts.
      • Where the Bill uses enumerated payment modes, future changes may be managed by prescribing additional modes or by cross-reference to a general definition in other sections.

      Full Text:

      Section 92 Income from other sources.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax