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
    Assessing Officer's Duty to Notify Losses : Clause 291 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 157 ...
    Statutory mechanism for the modification and revision of demand notices : Clause 290 of Income Tax B...
    Examination of Notice of Demand Provisions in Indian Tax Statutes : Clause 289 of the Income Tax Bil...
    Procedural Amendments and Rectification under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 288 of Income Tax Bill,...
    Procedural Safeguards and Rectification under Indian Tax Law : Clause 287 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Reforming Assessment Timelines of assessment, reassessment, and recomputation of income : Clause 286...
    procedural aspects of assessment, reassessment, and recomputation where income has allegedly escaped...
    From Faceless Assessment to Executive Schemes : Clause 532 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Authority and Accountability in Reopening Assessments : Clause 284 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. ...
    Expanding the Framework for Assessment in Consequence of Appellate Orders : Clause 283 of the Income...
    The Changing Landscape of Reassessment Notices in Indian Tax Law : Clause 282 of Income Tax Bill, 20...
    The New Framework for Reassessment Notices, Balancing Revenue Powers and Taxpayer Rights : Clause 28...
    Modernizing the Reassessment Notice Regime in Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 280 of the Income Tax B...
    Procedural and Substantive Shifts in Income Escaping Assessment : Clause 279 of Income Tax Bill, 202...
    Timing of Income Recognition of Compensation and Incentives : Clause 278 of Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs...
    Valuation of Inventory and Securities under Indian Tax Law : Clause 277 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025...
    Legal Framework and Practical Impact of Method of Accounting under Indian Income Tax : Clause 276 of...
    Comparative Legal Analysis of the DRP Mechanism : Clause 275 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sectio...
    Procedures and Legal Safeguards of "impermissible avoidance arrangements" (IAAs) : Clause 274 of the...
    Future of Faceless Assessment :Clause 273 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 144B of the Incom...
❯❯
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
    Intimation of loss: AO must issue written notification to enable carry forward and set-off of assessed losses.
    Clause 291 requires the Assessing Officer to notify the assessee by written order of the amount of loss computed for specified loss heads where a loss is established during assessment and is eligible for carry forward and set-off under the Bill; the written notification is the formal basis for claiming loss benefits in subsequent years, while the clause omits an express timeline, remedies for non-notification, and explicit treatment of appeal or rectification.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Modification of tax demand notices: AO must revise demands to reflect insolvency orders and subsequent appellate modifications.
    Clause 290 requires the Assessing Officer to serve a modified demand notice treated as a demand under the restructured Act where an earlier demand is reduced by an order under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, covering tax, interest, penalty, fine or any other sum, and mandates further revision if the insolvency order is altered on appeal.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Notice of demand: modernised formal notice and deferment for start up share compensation, aligning tax timing with liquidity events.
    Notice of demand is the statutory precondition for recovery: Clause 289(1) mandates issuance in a prescribed form for any payable sum following an order; Clause 289(2) deems certain system-generated intimations equivalent to notices to streamline automated recovery; Clause 289(3) defers tax on specified securities or sweat equity for eligible start-up employees until defined liquidity or employment-trigger events, thereby aligning tax payment timing with cash realization.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rectification of assessments: new provision expands AO authority to amend orders for subsequent events and compliance.
    Clause 288 consolidates and prescribes time-bound powers for Assessing Officers to amend assessment orders when subsequent judicial, administrative or factual events render original assessments incorrect, covering partner/AOP adjustments, recomputation for carry-forward losses, capital gains recharacterisation, foreign tax credit, TDS credit timing, transfer pricing amendments and related categories, with generally four-year limitation periods and an emphasis on digital procedural integration.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Rectification of mistakes apparent from the record: updated authority scope, procedural safeguards, and prescribed timelines ensure corrective relief.
    Clause 287 empowers income-tax authorities to rectify mistakes apparent from the record by amending orders and specified intimations, subject to the exclusion of matters already considered in appeal or revision. Rectification may be initiated suo motu or on application, but any amendment increasing liability requires prior notice and a reasonable opportunity to be heard and must be made by written order. Reductions of liability trigger refund obligations, increases trigger prescribed demand notices, and the power is constrained by a prescribed limitation period and a statutory timeline for disposal of applications.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Time limits for tax assessments clarified: tabular framework sets fixed periods, exclusions and minimum residual time for authorities.
    Reform replaces narrative limitation provisions with a tabular, scenario-based regime specifying trigger dates and fixed completion periods-generally one year for routine assessments and reassessments-with special shorter windows for modifications. The draft adds a twelve-month extension for transfer pricing references, an exhaustive list of periods to be excluded from limitation computations (stays, reopenings, treaty exchanges, GAAR references, valuation reports, advance rulings, search handovers, etc.), and safeguards ensuring minimum residual time for authorities, end-of-month extensions, and abatement/revival protections to preserve procedural continuity.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Tax rate parity: reassessment must use original-year rates, allowing dropping of proceedings if no extra liability.
    Clause 285 requires tax in assessments, reassessments or recomputations for escaped income to be charged at the rates that would have applied had the income been originally assessed; allows the Assessing Officer to drop reassessment proceedings if the assessee demonstrates that inclusion of the alleged escaped income would not increase tax liability and that the original assessment was not impugned under specified appellate or revision provisions; and bars the assessee from reopening matters concluded by certain specified orders once a claim to drop proceedings is made.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Executive power to frame tax administration schemes may reshape processes while raising delegation and legal certainty concerns.
    Clause 532 empowers the Central Government to notify schemes for any purpose under the Act to eliminate taxpayer-authority interface and optimize resources; it authorises modification or suspension of statutory provisions by notification to implement schemes, permits amendment of existing schemes for transitional continuity, and requires notifications be laid before Parliament, thereby enabling broad administrative reconfiguration through subordinate legislation while raising delegation, transparency, and legal certainty concerns.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Sanction authority centralization for reopening assessments shifts approval to Additional/Joint Commissioners, reducing prior higher level oversight.
    Clause 284 appoints Additional Commissioners, Additional Directors, Joint Commissioners, or Joint Directors as the sole authorities to grant sanction for notices under sections 280 and 281, replacing the earlier tiered sanction regime. It removes temporal thresholds and higher level approvals formerly applied to older or complex cases, centralizes decision making, omits explanatory and delegation provisions present in the prior framework, and may therefore streamline administration while raising concerns about reduced oversight, interpretive ambiguity, and possible increased litigation.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Giving effect to appellate findings: reassessment notices may issue despite limitation, subject to safeguards preventing reopening time barred years.
    Clause 283 (Income Tax Bill, 2025) and Section 150 (Income tax Act, 1961) permit issuance of assessment, reassessment or recomputation notices to give effect to a finding or direction in appellate, revisional or judicial orders, explicitly including tribunals and Approving Panel directions in the 2025 Bill. Both provisions preserve a limitation safeguard: notices cannot be issued if, when the original order (or reference to the Approving Panel) was made, the relevant year's assessment was already time barred. Notices must show a direct nexus to the operative finding or direction and remain subject to procedural requirements.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation periods for reassessment notices extended and a minimum cooling-off period introduced, retaining high-value reopening threshold.
    Clause 282 restructures limitation periods for notices under sections 280 and 281 by extending both standard and extended windows for reopening, retaining a high-value threshold that requires the Assessing Officer to possess books, documents or other evidence of substantial escapement, and by introducing a mandatory minimum cooling-off period before any notice may be issued; it does not explicitly replicate earlier exclusions for time spent in show-cause proceedings, court stays, or special provisions for foreign assets, creating potential interpretive gaps.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-notice hearing requirement: show cause with disclosed information, supervisory approval required before reassessment notices.
    Clause 281 requires that where the AO has information suggesting income has escaped assessment, the AO must serve a show cause notice accompanied by that information, allow the assessee to reply within the period specified, and, after considering the record and any reply, obtain prior approval of the specified authority before passing an order on whether to issue a notice under section 280. The clause omits explicit timelines, does not define the specified authority within the clause, and provides broader exceptions to the pre-notice requirement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment notice reform: information-driven reopening with prescribed timelines and mandatory higher-level approval to ensure procedural safeguards.
    Clause 280 requires the AO to issue a notice with a copy of the relevant order before reassessment, sets a maximum three-month period to furnish a prescribed, verified return, treats timely returns as equivalent to original returns while disallowing that status for belated filings, mandates that issuance be predicated on "information" suggesting escapement, and requires prior approval of a specified authority where information derives from centralized schemes, Approving Panel directions, or judicial/quasi-judicial orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment powers expand to permit assessment of escaped income and collateral issues even where certain procedural steps were missed.
    Clause 279 empowers the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess income and recompute losses, depreciation and other allowances where income escaping assessment is identified, substitutes "tax year" for "assessment year," and, while making AO's powers subject to sections 280-286, permits assessment of other issues that emerge during proceedings even if specified procedural sections were not complied with, thereby prioritising substantive tax determination over technical procedural infirmities.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Timing of income recognition: interest on compensation taxed on receipt; escalation claims taxed on reasonable certainty of realisation.
    Clause 278 deems interest on compensation or enhanced compensation taxable in the tax year of actual receipt, treats escalation claims and export incentives as income when reasonable certainty of realisation is achieved, and taxes specified incomes under section 2(49)(w) on receipt if not earlier charged, thereby aligning taxability with receipt or demonstrable certainty and aiming to prevent timing gaps while leaving factual application issues like allocation and evidentiary standards to further guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Inventory valuation rules require ICDS aligned costing, inclusion of statutory levies, and category wise securities valuation for tax computation.
    Inventory and securities for tax purposes must be valued in accordance with ICDS: inventory at the lower of actual cost or net realisable value, purchases, sales and inventory adjusted to include any tax, duty, cess or fee actually paid or incurred to bring goods or services to present location and condition; illiquid or unquoted securities at actual cost and regularly quoted securities at the lower of cost or NRV, with securities compared category wise and special treatment for scheduled banks and public financial institutions subject to prudential guidelines.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Method of accounting: mandatory consistency and binding tax standards lead to AO power to assess by best judgment.
    Clause 276 permits either the cash or mercantile system for computing income provided the system is regularly followed, authorises the Central Government to notify binding Income Computation and Disclosure Standards for classes of assessees or income, and empowers the Assessing Officer to disregard accounts and make a best judgment assessment where accounts are incorrect or incomplete, the accounting method is not regularly followed, or notified ICDS are not applied.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Dispute Resolution Panel mechanism: statutory draft-order review with binding, reasoned directions and strict timelines for tax variations.
    Clause 275 establishes a DRP mechanism requiring the AO to forward draft assessment orders with prejudicial variations to eligible assessees; assessees have thirty days to accept or object. The DRP, a collegium of three senior officers, may issue written, reasoned directions (confirming, reducing, or enhancing variations) within nine months; such directions are binding on the AO. The clause updates cross-references, vests rule-making power in the Board, and excludes specified proceedings and persons, while omitting an explicit statutory scheme for faceless DRP proceedings.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Impermissible avoidance arrangements: GAAR procedure mandates reference, Approving Panel review, and binding directions with safeguards.
    Clause 274 creates a multi-stage GAAR procedure: the Assessing Officer may refer suspected impermissible avoidance arrangements to the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner, who must notify the assessee and allow objections; absent or unsatisfactory responses permit directions or escalation to an independent Approving Panel. The Approving Panel, composed of a High Court judge, a senior revenue officer, and an academic, may summon evidence, hold hearings, and issue binding directions within set timelines; such directions are final under the Act, subject only to constitutional judicial review.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment set as statutory default under proposed bill, expanding electronic non-contact tax assessments and procedural framework.
    Clause 273 makes faceless assessment the statutory default for specified assessments, empowers the Board to define applicability, establishes a National Faceless Assessment Centre with Assessment, Verification, Technical and Review Units, assigns distinct functions to each unit to minimize discretion, mandates electronic communications via the NFAC, and contemplates transfers to the jurisdictional officer where faceless procedure is unsuitable, with procedural details to be prescribed by the Board.

    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 105 "Unexplained expenditure." 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 105 Unexplained expenditure.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      These two texts reproduce the same substantive provision dealing with "unexplained expenditure" that is to be included in an assessee's income: one is presented as Section 105 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (final Act text) and the other as Clause 105 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (bill-stage text). Both provide that expenditure for which no satisfactory explanation as to source is offered shall be deemed income for that tax year and shall not be allowed as a deduction. The provision affects taxpayers and the assessing authority; no effective date is stated in the texts.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Section/Clause 105 titled "Unexplained expenditure" under the heading "AGGREGATION OF INCOME" in the Income-tax Act/Bill, 2025. The provision addresses circumstances in which expenditure incurred by an assessee in a tax year will be treated as income by deeming it unexplained and not deductible. No definitions (for example, of "expenditure", "source", "assessee", "satisfactory", or "Assessing Officer") are supplied in either document. No cross-references to other sections, rules, or schedules are included in the texts provided.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Both texts contain two sub-sections with substantially identical operative effects:

      • Sub-section (1): Where the assessee has incurred expenditure in any tax year and either (a) offers no explanation about the source of such expenditure or part thereof; or (b) offers an explanation which is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, then that amount (or the part) shall be deemed to be the income of the assessee for that tax year.

      • Sub-section (2): The amount deemed as income under sub-section (1) shall not be allowed as a deduction under this Act, irrespective of any other provision of the Act.

      Coverage: Any expenditure incurred by an assessee in any tax year, subject to the two alternative factual predicates in sub-section (1). The deeming is limited to the amount "covered by such expenditure or part thereof".

      Interpretation

      The text frames a deeming fiction: expenditure lacking an acceptable explanation of its source is converted into income for that year. The provision delegates a fact-finding and evaluative role to the Assessing Officer by reference to the officer's opinion on the sufficiency of the explanation. The provision is neutral as to the type of expenditure; it speaks broadly to "any expenditure". It also imposes a negative consequence on deduction: once deemed, the expenditure cannot be claimed as a deduction "irrespective of any other provision".

      Exceptions/Provisos

      No exceptions, provisos, thresholds, monetary limits, or procedural safeguards are included in either text. There is no provision for appeals, burden of proof allocation, evidentiary standards, or requirement that the Assessing Officer record reasons in writing in the texts supplied. There is no provision for partial acceptance beyond the deeming of "amount covered by such expenditure or part thereof" (which allows proportional deeming), but the criteria for apportionment are not stated.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A taxpayer incurs expenditure of Rs. 10 lakhs in a tax year and offers no explanation as to the source. Under sub-section (1)(a) Rs. 10 lakhs shall be deemed to be the taxpayer's income for that year and, under sub-section (2), shall not be allowed as a deduction. (This example is a direct application of the text; factual details beyond the legislative language are Not stated in the document.)

      • Example 2: A taxpayer incurs Rs. 5 lakhs; the taxpayer offers an explanation, but the Assessing Officer considers the explanation unsatisfactory. Under sub-section (1)(b) Rs. 5 lakhs shall be deemed income and excluded from deductions. (No further guidance on what constitutes "satisfactory" is provided.)

      Interplay

      Neither text cites or mentions any Rules, Notifications, circulars, or other statutory provisions that would govern implementation, procedure, evidence, or appeals. The provision's sub-section (2) states a non-obstante clause ("Irrespective of any other provision of this Act") limiting the availability of deductions once an amount is deemed income, thus indicating priority over other deduction provisions in the Act. Any further interplay with provisions dealing with burden of proof, assessment procedure, search and seizure, unexplained cash credits, or penal consequences is Not stated in the document.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: The provision places on taxpayers the practical need to be able to explain the source of expenditures. Failure to do so, or an explanation judged unsatisfactory by the Assessing Officer, results in automatic inclusion of the amount as income and a categorical bar on claiming a deduction for that amount.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text implies but does not specify that taxpayers should retain documentary evidence relevant to the source of expenditure (bank records, invoices, contracts, receipts). Specific records required, standards of proof, or timelines to produce evidence are Not stated in the document.

      Differences Between the Two Provisions & Practical Impact

      TopicClause 105 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old VersionSection 105 of the Income-tax Act, 2025
      Sub-section (1)(b) wording"the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer," (no express reference to "about the source")"the explanation offered about the source of such expenditure by the assessee is not satisfactory in the opinion of the Assessing Officer," - explicitly ties the unsatisfactory explanation to the source
      Explanatory noteContains an additional explanatory sentence: "Clause 105 of the Bill provides for the circumstances or conditions in which any expenditure incurred by the assessee shall be deemed to be unexplained expenditure and be included in the total income of the assessee."No explanatory sentence; presents the provision as codified "Section 105" in the Act.
      Substantive effectSubstantively the same deeming and bar on deduction.Substantively the same deeming and bar on deduction.

      Practical impact of differences: The Act's explicit insertion of "about the source of such expenditure" in sub-clause (b) clarifies that the satisfaction inquiry for the Assessing Officer is confined to the source of the expenditure, not to other unrelated aspects (such as purpose or quantum). While the Bill wording in Clause 105 is broader and could be read to allow the Assessing Officer to treat any unsatisfactory explanation (on any aspect) as basis for deeming, the Act wording narrows the evaluative focus to the source. This narrowing reduces potential ambiguity about what the officer may assess as "not satisfactory" and may marginally constrain the scope of the Assessing Officer's evaluative discretion to source-related matters. However, both versions preserve broad discretion to the Assessing Officer, and neither supplies standards, evidentiary thresholds, or procedural safeguards; those omissions remain material in practice.

      Key Takeaways

      • Both texts enact a deeming provision that converts unexplained expenditure into income and disallows any deduction in respect of that amount.
      • The Act version clarifies that the Assessing Officer's satisfaction pertains to the source of expenditure; the Bill language was marginally broader.
      • No procedural safeguards, definitions, or evidentiary standards are provided in either text; these are Not stated in the document.
      • Taxpayers bear practical risk and should maintain source-supporting documentation, although the provision does not prescribe what documentation suffices.
      • The non-obstante clause in sub-section (2) prioritises this deeming over other deduction provisions in the Act.

      Full Text:

      Section 105 Unexplained expenditure.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax