Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ 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 characters 0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

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.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Residential Status and Jurisdictional Shift in Income Tax Cases
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Scrutinizing the Genuineness of Gifts in Income Tax Law: Taxability of Gift u/s 68
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting TDS Liability u/s 194-I against Lease Payments: A Legal Analysis of Security Deposit vs...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Evaluating Jurisdictional Validity in Taxation: The Significance of Draft Assessment Orders under Se...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Breaking Down the Supreme Court's Decision on Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Balancing Sovereignty and Law: India's Treaty-Making Powers and Domestic Enforcement
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating DTAAs: A Comparative Analysis of India, Netherlands, France, and Switzerland
    Case Laws Income Tax
    The OECD Membership Puzzle: Interpreting 'Is' in Double Taxation Agreements
    Case Laws Income Tax
    The Dual Life of Treaties: Understanding Their Enforcement in Indian Law
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Assessment Proceedings and Validity of Section 143(2) Notices: Jurisdictional Clarity and Monetary L...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Unexplained Cash Deposits and Section 115BBE: Applicability of Higher Rate of Tax
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 127 of the Income Tax Act: A Case Study on Jurisdictional Transfer
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting Sections 22, 23, and 24: Taxation of Notional Rental Income from House Property and Vac...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 153A and Income Tax Assessments Post Search and Seizure Operations: Exploring the Role of In...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analysis of Judicial Approach in Tax Evasion through Accommodation Entries: A Case Study
    Case Laws Income Tax
    The Taxation of Cooperative Societies: A Legal Analysis of Deduction Eligibility U/s 80P
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analyzing Section 43B's Application in Service Tax Liabilities: A Legal Perspective.
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Assessing the Enforceability of Section 148 Notices Post-Assessee's Demise: Legal Heirs and Income T...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analyzing the Threshold for Criminal Prosecution in Cases of Non-Compliance with Income Tax Laws
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Timeliness and Validity of Charitable Trust Registrations under Section 80G: A Legal Examination
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Residential status determination can shift tax assessment jurisdiction when overseas activities do not qualify as employment.
The Tribunal examined whether the appellant's overseas activities constituted employment for residential-status purposes, applying ejusdem generis and noscitur a sociis to conclude they did not. Consequently, the officer of international taxation's assumption of jurisdiction based on non resident status was improper once residential status was contested; the file should have been transferred to the territorially competent assessing officer or an authorised officer. An assessment conducted without such lawful jurisdiction was characterised as legally defective and without effect.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Genuineness of gifts requires proof of donor identity and capacity, otherwise taxability follows under assessment rules.
The High Court examined taxation of receipts treated as gifts, stressing that the assessee must prove the genuineness of gifts by establishing donor identity and the donors' capacity and creditworthiness; acceptance by lower authorities does not relieve the recipient of the burden of proof, and inadequate documentary corroboration justifies reassessment where donations are doubtful.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Advance rent characterization alters TDS obligations under Section 194-I, requiring payers to deduct tax at source.
Payments labelled as a security deposit that are contractually reduced and adjusted against periodic rent payments are treated as advance rent rather than refundable security, and thus constitute rent for TDS purposes, obliging the payer to deduct tax at source under the statutory withholding framework.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Draft assessment procedure required under law: omission invalidates assessment proceedings and denies assessee DRP objection rights.
Section 144C mandates a non-obstante, mandatory draft assessment procedure for eligible assessees, requiring issuance of a draft order, opportunity to file objections, and consideration by a three-member Dispute Resolution Panel. A foreign entity qualifying as an eligible assessee must be afforded this process; failure to issue the draft order is a substantive lapse that deprives the assessee of the DRP forum and engenders jurisdictional infirmity in any consequent final assessment, demand, or penalty. Revisionary powers do not obviate the Section 144C mandate.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
DTAA incorporation: notification requirement under domestic law limits automatic treaty application across countries and clarifies temporal scope.
The decision holds that a DTAA requires a mandatory notification under Section 90(1) to be effective domestically, that provisions in a DTAA with one country do not automatically extend to other bilateral agreements without explicit amendment, and that the present-tense term "is" fixes the temporal application of treaty benefits to the date of treaty entry with India.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Most favoured nation clause interpretation guides treaty effect, subject to domestic notification requirements for implementation.
The Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause in tax treaties must be interpreted under Article 31 VCLT principles as reflecting customary international law, with subsequent agreements and state practice serving as authentic means of interpretation. Domestic implementation procedures materially affect treaty operation: comparative practices of other states cannot substitute for India's requirement of formal domestic steps, including issuance of a notification after a treaty trigger event, to assimilate treaty amendments into national law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Treaty implementation procedures determine when DTAA modifications bind taxpayers, requiring domestic notification for enforceability.
In India, DTAA modifications take effect only upon formal domestic notification, preventing automatic retroactive application of third country treaty changes and reflecting a dualist approach requiring assimilation of treaty amendments into domestic law before they bind taxpayers; by contrast, the Netherlands, France, and Switzerland rely on differing domestic mechanisms-executive decrees, parliamentary ratification, or referenda and implementing orders-that may permit retroactive application and integrate treaties into domestic enforceable law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Interpretation of "is" in tax treaties determines when OECD membership triggers treaty benefits under domestic implementation rules.
Interpretation of the term "is" in DTAAs is context-dependent: although generally present in signification, its temporal application must be determined from the treaty text and purpose. Applied to OECD membership, the operative moment for eligibility to treaty benefits depends on when the DTAA relationship produces the relevant legal consequence, and this assessment must be reconciled with the domestic requirement for legislative action or notification for treaty enforceability.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Treaty Enforcement: legislative enactment required for treaties to create domestic rights; executive negotiation alone is insufficient.
Treaties do not function as self-executing domestic law; the Union may negotiate and ratify international agreements but legislative enactment is required to create or alter domestic rights and obligations. Under the dualist approach, executive negotiation and foreign measures cannot substitute for domestic incorporation; implementing statutes and notification mechanisms are necessary for tax treaties to be recognized and applied by revenue authorities. Courts may consult treaty texts to resolve ambiguities in domestic implementing laws but cannot themselves import treaty provisions into domestic law absent parliamentary enactment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Jurisdictional validity of Section 143(2) notices: invalid issuance by wrong officer vitiates ensuing scrutiny proceedings.
The tribunal found that a statutory scrutiny notice issued by an officer without jurisdiction at the time of issuance was defective, and that subsequent action by another assessing officer did not cure the initial defect; jurisdictional allocation must follow administrative monetary thresholds for metropolitan corporate returns, and failure to issue a valid notice at initiation vitiates scrutiny proceedings.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Unexplained cash deposits: prospective application of higher tax rate under Section 115BBE clarified for post-amendment assessments.
The assessing process treated certain cash receipts as unexplained under Section 69A read with the higher-rate taxation provision, but acceptance of an opening cash balance and maintenance of a cash book reduced the addition; contemporaneous records are decisive. The amendment imposing a special flat tax rate on unexplained income applies prospectively and does not operate retrospectively, so its applicability depends on the assessment year.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Jurisdictional transfer under Section 127 can reassign assessments within the same city without prior hearing, as an administrative measure.
Jurisdictional transfer under Section 127 empowers senior tax officials to reassign cases for administrative convenience, generally requiring reasons and an opportunity to be heard; however, transfers within the same city do not require prior hearing. The tribunal found a valid transfer order centralising the matter within the same city, held the absence of prior hearing immaterial under the intra-city exception, and concluded the administrative transfer did not prejudice the assessee or invalidate the assessment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Notional rental income: ownership can trigger annual value assessment with standard deduction; vacancy allowance restricted when not let.
Ownership alone can give rise to taxable annual value by way of notional rental income, with annual value for unlet properties determined by reference to expected rent and, where applicable, by a proportionate measure of property cost. From that annual value the statutory 30% standard deduction and interest on borrowed capital are deductible. Vacancy allowance is not treated as available where properties remain unlet for the entire year, and balance-sheet disclosure of property ownership can support assessment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Incriminating material discovered during search permits reassessment under Section 153A, validating additional income adjustments by tax authorities.
The Tribunal applied the principle that discovery of previously undisclosed documents during a search can constitute incriminating material, thereby activating Section 153A jurisdiction to reassess income for multiple prior years. It found an undisclosed balance sheet showing ownership of properties as incriminating, and addressed related challenges - estimation of house property income, jurisdictional objections, notice deficiencies, interest levies, and natural justice claims - against the backdrop of valid reassessment under the search-linked provision.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Genuineness of transactions: accommodation entries and circumstantial evidence can defeat claimed tax exemptions without commercial substance.
Denial of exemption under Section 10(38) is justified where claims rest on paper companies and accommodation entry providers; synchronized trading, SEBI identified price rigging, and weak connection between claimants and transactions diminish the probative value of demat statements and share certificates. The legal focus is on the onus of proof, application of the preponderance of probabilities and circumstantial inferences, requiring the assessee to establish commercial substance for unsecured loans and claimed trades rather than rely solely on documentation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Deduction under Section 80P for cooperative societies hinges on mutuality and classification as cooperative banks.
Deduction eligibility under Section 80P depends on the principle of mutuality and on whether receipts involve entities that qualify as banking companies; interest income meeting mutuality criteria may be deductible for cooperative societies, whereas interest arising from dealings with entities classifiable as banks should be treated as income from other sources. The tribunal required verification of claims and reclassification of such interest where applicable.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Section 43B payment rule prevents deduction for unpaid service tax, altering taxable income and accounting timing.
Section 43B's payment-based rule makes deductions allowable only on actual payment; applied to service tax, unpaid service tax not remitted before the return filing due date is disallowable and may be treated as part of assessee's income, despite not being charged to profit and loss. Under mercantile accounting service tax received must be included in turnover, and legislative changes to payment schedules affect compliance timing; precedents reinforce that non-payment precludes deduction under the non-absentee payment requirement of Section 43B.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Validity of reassessment notices to deceased assessees hinges on proper service to legal heirs, else jurisdiction is lacking.
The core legal rule is that reassessment notices must be served on a living person or the legal heir; issuance to a deceased individual vitiates jurisdiction. Service on the correct person is a condition precedent to reassessment, and legal heirs have no statutory duty to inform authorities of death. Legal representative liability arises only where proceedings began during the assessee's lifetime and may be continued against successors. Courts may restrain actions taken without jurisdiction while statutory remedies remain available.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Failure to file tax returns within the prescribed time can sustain criminal prosecution despite later accepted belated returns.
The dispute focuses on prosecution under Section 276CC for failure to file returns within the prescribed time, where acceptance of a belated return and dismissal of penalty proceedings do not necessarily negate the presumption of mens rea; the accused bears the burden to rebut intentional concealment, and evidential material from searches indicating undisclosed transactions can sustain criminal proceedings.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Timeliness of Section 80G applications: application treated as timely and statutory reconsideration directed under purposive interpretation.
Timeliness of registration under Section 80G was examined with focus on statutory deadlines, the effect of provisional approval under Section 80G(5), and amendments impacting trusts that commenced activities before formal registration; interpretation emphasised purposive and harmonious construction, legislative intent, natural justice in notice and hearing, and directed reconsideration of eligibility with opportunity to submit documents.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Comparison of Section 111 "Carry forward and set off of loss from Capital gains." 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 111 Carry forward and set off of loss from Capital gains.

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

The documents are two versions of Clause/Section 111 dealing with carry forward and set off of loss from "Capital gains": (i) Clause 111 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (Document 2); and (ii) Section 111 as enacted in the Income-tax Act, 2025 (Document 1). They govern how capital losses that are not absorbed in a tax year are carried forward and set off in subsequent years. The provisions affect taxpayers realizing capital gains/losses and the tax administration in assessing carry-forward claims. Effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: the documents are framed as Clause/Section 111 under the heading "SET OFF, OR CARRY FORWARD AND SET OFF OF LOSSES" in the Income Tax Bill/Act, 2025. Both texts address the treatment of losses computed under the head "Capital gains" that are not fully set off in the year of computation. The Bill (old version) expressly defines the term "unabsorbed capital loss" in its subsection (4); the enacted Section uses the phrase "loss computed under the head 'Capital gains'" without introducing the specific term "unabsorbed capital loss." Coverage: carry forward to subsequent years and the order/limitation of set off between short-term and long-term capital losses and gains; temporal limit on carry forward (eight tax years). Definitions or further explanations beyond the term "unabsorbed capital loss" (in the Bill) are Not stated in the document.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

Clause 111 (Bill, Old Version) provides a regime for carry forward and set off of "unabsorbed capital loss." Subsection (1) mandates carry forward of any unabsorbed capital loss to the subsequent tax year and directs set off as per subsection (2). Subsection (2) distinguishes between long-term and short-term capital losses: (a) long-term capital losses may be set off only against gains from transfer of other long-term capital assets; (b) short-term capital losses shall be set off against gains from transfer of any other capital asset. Sub-section (3) limits carry forward to not more than eight tax years immediately succeeding the tax year in which the loss was first computed. Subsection (4) defines "unabsorbed capital loss" as loss computed under "Capital gains" not wholly set off u/s 108 for that tax year.

Interpretation

Legislative intent beyond the text is Not stated in the document. Interpretive principles indicated: the text implements a tiered set-off approach reflecting the long-term/short-term distinction and confirms temporal limitation (eight years). The express cross-reference to section 108 in the definition suggests the intended sequence: first apply intra-year set off u/s 108; residual unabsorbed loss becomes eligible for carry forward under Clause 111. Any broader policy intent (e.g., rationale for eight-year limit) is Not stated in the document.

Exceptions/Provisos

No provisos or express exceptions are contained in Clause 111 other than the bifurcated set-off limitation between long-term and short-term losses and the eight-year temporal cap. Specific exemptions, conditions, or special cases (e.g., treatment on change of ownership, mergers, or conversions) are Not stated in the document.

Illustrations

  • Example 1: Taxpayer A incurs a long-term capital loss of 1,00,000 in Tax Year 1 and has no long-term capital gains that year. In Tax Year 2, A realises long-term capital gain of 60,000 and short-term gain of 50,000. Under Clause 111, the unabsorbed long-term loss may be set off only against the long-term gain - 60,000 set off - leaving 40,000 carried forward (subject to the eight-year limit).

  • Example 2: Taxpayer B has a short-term capital loss of 80,000 in Tax Year 1 and in Tax Year 2 realises long-term capital gain of 30,000 and short-term capital gain of 20,000. The short-term loss can be set off against "capital gains from transfer of any other capital asset," i.e., against both long-term and short-term capital gains; total gains 50,000 are absorbed, leaving 30,000 for carry forward (subject to eight-year limit).

  • Example 3: If by the end of eight subsequent tax years the unabsorbed loss remains unutilised, it cannot be carried forward further under subsection (3). (Concrete facts such as exact years or taxpayer identity are Not stated in the document.)

Interplay

Clause 111 expressly references section 108 in its definition of "unabsorbed capital loss," indicating an intended sequencing relationship: first apply set-off provisions of section 108 within the year, then determine the residual unabsorbed amount for carry forward under Clause 111. Other Rules, Notifications, or Circulars that might affect computation, forms, or procedural aspects are Not stated in the document. Interaction with provisions dealing with aggregation of assets, clubbing, or transferor-transferee adjustments is Not stated in the document.

Differences Between the Clause 111 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version and Section 111 of the Income-tax Act, 2025

Topic Clause 111 (Bill, Old Version) Section 111 (Act, Enacted)
Terminology/Defined Term Introduces and defines "unabsorbed capital loss" in subsection (4): loss computed under head "Capital gains" not wholly set off u/s 108. Uses phrase "loss computed under the head 'Capital gains'"; no separate defined term "unabsorbed capital loss".
Structure and Subdivision Organised into subsections (1)-(4) with explicit cross-reference to "sub-section (2)" for set-off mechanism. Organised into subsection (1)(a)(i)/(ii) and (b), and subsection (2) limiting carry forward to eight years; no discrete definition subsection.
Set-off directions for short-term capital loss Subsection (2)(b): short-term capital asset loss "shall be set off against capital gains, if any, from transfer of any other capital asset" in the subsequent year(s). Subsection (1)(a)(i): short-term capital loss "shall be set off only against the income under the head 'Capital gains' ... in respect of any other capital asset."
Set-off directions for long-term capital loss Subsection (2)(a): long-term capital asset loss "may be set off only against capital gains, if any, from transfer of any other long-term capital asset." Subsection (1)(a)(ii): long-term capital loss "shall be set off only against the income under the head 'Capital gains' ... in respect of any other long-term capital asset."
Carry-forward duration Subsection (3): carry forward "not being more than eight tax years immediately succeeding the tax year in which such loss was first computed." Subsection (2): "No loss shall be carried forward ... for more than eight tax years immediately succeeding the tax year for which the loss was first computed."
Express cross-reference to section 108 Defines "unabsorbed capital loss" by reference to non-absorption u/s 108. No explicit cross-reference to section 108; simply states loss as computed under the head "Capital gains".
  • Practical impact - Terminology: The Bill's explicit definition of "unabsorbed capital loss" clarifies the point at which carry forward applies (i.e., after set-off u/s 108); the enacted Section omits the defined label but retains the practical concept. This definitional clarity reduces potential ambiguity in assessing whether a loss is eligible for carry forward.

  • Practical impact - Substance: The substantive set-off rules are materially the same (short-term losses can be set off against any capital gains; long-term losses only against long-term gains) and both limit carry forward to eight years. Therefore, practical tax outcomes for most taxpayers remain unchanged.

  • Practical impact - Drafting/interpretation risk: Differences are largely drafting and labelling; however, the Bill's cross-reference to section 108 may aid interpretive disputes over the sequencing of set-off, whereas the enacted Section's omission of that explicit reference could lead to argument on whether set-off u/s 108 is a precondition - though the enacted section's language implies the same sequencing. Litigation risk is modest but present.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers should ensure correct classification of capital assets as long-term or short-term for set-off eligibility; failure to apply subsection (2) accurately may lead to disallowance of set-off and demands. The Bill's defined term reduces risk of disagreement on when a loss becomes eligible for carry forward by linking it to non-absorption u/s 108.
  • Record-keeping/evidence: Retain computation records demonstrating (i) application of section 108 in the year of loss, (ii) segregation of long-term vs short-term losses, (iii) subsequent-year capital gains computations showing set off, and (iv) chronology evidencing the eight-year carry-forward timeline. Specific documentary requirements or forms are Not stated in the document.

Key Takeaways

  • Both texts enact a carry-forward regime for capital losses with an eight-year temporal limit; substantive outcomes for taxpayers are largely consistent across versions.
  • The Bill (old version) adds a specific defined term "unabsorbed capital loss" and links it to non-absorption u/s 108, clarifying the sequencing for set-off and carry forward.
  • Long-term capital losses can only be set off against long-term capital gains; short-term losses can be set off against gains from any capital asset.
  • No exceptions, special cases, or procedural mechanics (forms, rates, or effective date) are specified in either text; such matters are Not stated in the document.
  • Practical compliance relies on accurate classification of assets, documentation of intra-year set off u/s 108, and monitoring of the eight-year carry-forward window.

Full Text:

Section 111 Carry forward and set off of loss from Capital gains.

Topics

Acts Income Tax