Just a moment...

⚠ ✕
❮ Top
☎ Help
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Keyword Search :
AI Tools : New
Ask tax questions in natural language. Powered by AI trained on the TaxTMI legal database. Use AI Tools ➞
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
  6. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  7. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
    8. 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.
Relevance Default Date
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether proceedings can be reopened on the basis of a favourable decision in another case?
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether a wrong decision by jurisdictional court is binding on the parties in absence of any appeal ...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether an order becomes a final order if no appeal has been filed against it?
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether right to appeal is a inherent right? Whether it is necessary that right of appeal must be ex...
    Manuals Service Tax
    What is the meaning of 'Reason to Believe' in context to search & seizure provisions?
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether in case, composite price (inclusive of service tax) is shown in invoice and no separate duty...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether Doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable on finalisation of provisional assessments?
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether Doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable on duty paid under protest?
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether data in "CD" can be a admissible evidence for refund claim under Section 11B? Whether data i...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether limitation of refund filing is applicable on the cases where amount paid to the department a...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether deposit of service tax before rendering services will be covered under limitation of refund...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether Appellate authority has empowered to increase the penalty? Whether Appellate authority can i...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether the penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be reduced below the minimum limit...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be reduced below the limit prescri...
    Act Rules Service Tax
    Whether Service tax paid by back calculations i.e. service tax separately not charged will be covere...
    Act Rules Service Tax
    Whether assessee is liable to pay collected service tax as per provision of Sec.73A even if his turn...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether ignorance of law can be a factor for not to revoke extended period of limitation?
    Manuals Service Tax
    In what circumstances extended period of limitation is not enforceable? Whether SCN can be issued fo...
    Act Rules Service Tax
    Whether show cause notice related to period beyond 18 months or 5 years as the case may be, is valid...
    Manuals Service Tax
    Whether it is mandatory to mention specific head / sub head of services in SCN in which demand of se...
❮
❯
❯❯
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:

Open Link
Notes
Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
Results Found:
Show All Summaries Hide All Summaries
Manuals Service Tax
Whether proceedings can be reopened on the basis of a favourable decision in another case?
Show AI Summary
Finality of proceedings: tax assessments cannot be reopened due to another taxpayer's favourable decision without recall in the same case.
Reopening tax assessment proceedings based on a favourable decision in another assessee's case is ordinarily not permitted; a final order in an assessee's own case remains effective until it is specifically recalled or set aside in that same proceeding.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether a wrong decision by jurisdictional court is binding on the parties in absence of any appeal ...
Show AI Summary
Finality of unappealed decisions: unchallenged jurisdictional rulings bind the parties until lawfully reversed.
A jurisdictional court's unappealed ruling, even if incorrect, becomes final and binding between the parties and remains so until reversed by a higher forum or other statutory remedy; thus unchallenged classificatory or determinative decisions must be obeyed in subsequent proceedings unless lawfully set aside.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether an order becomes a final order if no appeal has been filed against it?
Show AI Summary
Finality of administrative orders follows when no appeal is filed, and remand directions limit reconsideration scope.
An administrative order attains finality where an entitled party does not file an appeal against a Tribunal disposition; remand orders limit reconsideration to the specific issues directed by the Tribunal, and parties who do not contest merits before the Tribunal forfeit the ability to re argue those merits, so that authorities acting on remand cannot expand review beyond the remand directions.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether right to appeal is a inherent right? Whether it is necessary that right of appeal must be ex...
Show AI Summary
Right of appeal is not inherent; it exists only when statute creates and defines it, including scope and procedure.
The right of appeal is not inherent but is a statutory construct: appellate existence, scope and procedure must be authorized by the creating provision; omissions in citation do not automatically bar an otherwise maintainable appeal; absence of an appellate provision does not prevent an order from becoming final.
Manuals Service Tax
What is the meaning of 'Reason to Believe' in context to search & seizure provisions?
Show AI Summary
Reason to believe requires subjective belief grounded in material evidence, preventing arbitrary or capricious searches.
The concept of reason to believe requires that a subjective opinion be based on material on the record, not arbitrary or whimsical; it must be held in good faith and courts may test whether the reasons have a rational and relevant connection to the formation of belief, excluding extraneous considerations.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether in case, composite price (inclusive of service tax) is shown in invoice and no separate duty...
Show AI Summary
Inclusive pricing does not establish passing on of tax burden; composite invoices alone do not prove unjust enrichment.
Showing a composite price on an invoice does not, by itself, establish that the supplier passed the tax burden to customers or realized unjust enrichment; where prices remained unchanged after a tax was imposed, inclusive pricing alone is insufficient evidence that any element of tax was added to the price, and proof of an added tax component is required to infer passing on of the tax.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether Doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable on finalisation of provisional assessments?
Show AI Summary
Doctrine of unjust enrichment excluded where a refund arises only after finalisation of provisional assessment.
The doctrine of unjust enrichment does not apply to refund claims that arise after the finalisation of provisional assessments; refunds or recoveries consequent on the final determination of duty liability fall outside the interim statutory refund framework and are not barred by unjust enrichment objections.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether Doctrine of unjust enrichment is applicable on duty paid under protest?
Show AI Summary
Unjust enrichment doctrine not bar to refund of duty paid under protest; provisional assessments preserve refund entitlement.
The doctrine of unjust enrichment does not bar refund claims for duty paid under protest; recoveries or refunds consequent on final determination of duty liability fall outside bars that would deny restitution. Provisional assessments and unresolved price and classification lists render clearances provisional, supporting the taxpayer's entitlement to have refund claims adjudicated on the basis of final liability rather than dismissed as struck by unjust enrichment.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether data in "CD" can be a admissible evidence for refund claim under Section 11B? Whether data i...
Show AI Summary
Admissibility of electronic records: computerised data on CD can support service tax refund claims and show no transfer of tax burden.
Data on compact disc (CD) can be admissible evidence for service tax refund claims where it constitutes computerised records recognised under the Information Technology Act and the Service Tax Rules. Such electronic records may also be used to prove that the incidence of service tax was not transferred to another party (absence of unjust enrichment), provided the data meets the statutory criteria for admissible computerised evidence and forms part of the assessee's maintained electronic records.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether limitation of refund filing is applicable on the cases where amount paid to the department a...
Show AI Summary
Limitation on refund filings: time-bar inapplicable where payments were not service tax and were excess realisations.
Limitation under Section 11B(1) applies only to refund claims of a duty of excise and interest; payments not constituting service tax or lawful excise levy are outside that bar and may be refunded. Judicial authorities (M/s Natraj and Venkat Associates; ITC Ltd.) recognise that excess realisations beyond what the statute permits are realisations outside the Act and thus not subject to the statutory limitation on excise refunds.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether deposit of service tax before rendering services will be covered under limitation of refund...
Show AI Summary
Limitation on service tax refunds: late claims are barred unless tax was paid under protest.
Refunds of amounts paid as service tax are governed by the statutory limitation provisions; where payments were credited to the service tax account and the claimant acknowledged applicability of the limitation rule, a refund claim filed after the limitation period is barred unless the tax was paid under protest.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether Appellate authority has empowered to increase the penalty? Whether Appellate authority can i...
Show AI Summary
Appellate authority power to increase penalties is limited; payment of tax and interest can justify mitigation of penalty.
Appellate authority does not have power to increase or impose a fresh penalty; payment of tax and interest that neutralises pecuniary advantage is relevant for mitigation, and taxpayer status and proportionality are material in assessing whether a revised penalty is unduly harsh under the statutory penalty framework.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether the penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be reduced below the minimum limit...
Show AI Summary
Penalty minimums prohibited from reduction: statutory scheme prevents lowering prescribed service tax penalty through discretionary provisions.
Penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 cannot be reduced below the statutory minimum by invoking section 80; a conjoint reading of the provisions shows no discretion to levy or reduce a penalty below the prescribed floor, and appellate bodies and tribunals cannot read such power into the statutory scheme.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 can be reduced below the limit prescri...
Show AI Summary
Penalty under Section 76 cannot be reduced below the statutory minimum; authority's discretion is confined to the prescribed range.
Section 76 penalty under the Finance Act, 1994 confines the authority to a legislatively prescribed minimum-to-maximum range; authorities lack power to reduce the penalty below the statutory minimum per day of default, and courts have rejected construing any additional discretion into the provision as that would amount to rewriting the statute.
Act Rules Service Tax
Whether Service tax paid by back calculations i.e. service tax separately not charged will be covere...
Show AI Summary
Service tax deposit obligations do not arise where tax was not invoiced or collected, limiting unjust enrichment claims.
Where no invoice was raised and no amount was specifically collected as service tax from recipients, the statutory duty to deposit such tax does not arise because there is no collected tax to be held on behalf of the Government, and absence of pass through means the legal condition for invoking unjust enrichment is not satisfied.
Act Rules Service Tax
Whether assessee is liable to pay collected service tax as per provision of Sec.73A even if his turn...
Show AI Summary
Deposit of collected service tax must be remitted even if small provider exempt; penalties apply for non-deposit.
Section 73A requires that service tax collected from customers be deposited with the Central Government even if the collector avails the small service provider exemption; tribunals have held that collection triggers an obligatory deposit and failure to deposit and to file returns attracts penal action and enforcement for non-compliance.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether ignorance of law can be a factor for not to revoke extended period of limitation?
Show AI Summary
Ignorance of law or illiteracy can undermine findings of willful suppression, affecting the validity of tax demand and penalties.
Administrative demands and penalties based on alleged willful suppression of taxable services require supporting record evidence and must correspond to allegations in the show cause notice; where the record does not substantiate suppression and the allegation was not made in the notice, the resultant service tax demand and penalties are not sustainable.
Manuals Service Tax
In what circumstances extended period of limitation is not enforceable? Whether SCN can be issued fo...
Show AI Summary
Extended limitation period: not available where assessee had bona fide belief or doubt about service tax liability.
Extended limitation cannot be invoked where the assessee had a bona fide belief that no service tax was payable, where bona fide doubt existed about chargeability, where the assessee voluntarily approached the department earlier, where the issue is one of legal interpretation creating genuine confusion, or where earlier favorable decisions were subsequently overruled without evidence of suppression.
Act Rules Service Tax
Whether show cause notice related to period beyond 18 months or 5 years as the case may be, is valid...
Show AI Summary
Limitation for recovery of service tax prevents collection for time barred periods but notice remains partly effective.
A show cause notice that includes periods beyond the statutory limitation does not become wholly invalid; the Department cannot recover tax for time barred periods, and the assessee may raise the limitation defence during proceedings. The same rule applies to notices extending beyond a shorter statutory limitation-the excess period yields no departmental entitlement to recovery but does not vitiate valid allegations within the limitation.
Manuals Service Tax
Whether it is mandatory to mention specific head / sub head of services in SCN in which demand of se...
Show AI Summary
Specific service allegation: tax liability cannot be confirmed unless the show-cause notice specifies the service head.
A show-cause notice must specifically identify the service head or sub-head relied upon; absent a precise allegation as to the applicable classification, tax liability cannot be confirmed, and alternative classifications suggested by the Commissioner without being pleaded in the notice render any demand unsustainable.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Home › TMI Notes › Income Tax › Act-Rules › Category › This
Back

All TMI Notes

whatsapp Join Channel
Showing Results for : Reset Filters
Income Tax

Comparison of Section 119 "Carry forward and set off of losses not permissible in certain cases." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

2 September, 2025

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Print Options

Section 119 Carry forward and set off of losses not permissible in certain cases.

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

These materials set out Clause 119 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) and Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 - both addressing restrictions on carry forward and set off of losses where there is change in constitution of firms, succession in business, or change in shareholding of companies. The provisions affect taxpayers (firms and companies), and the tax administration whenever continuity of ownership or control is questioned for loss carry-forwards. Effective dates or enactment/notification dates: Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: the text sits under the chapter on "Set off, or carry forward and set off of losses" and cross-refers to section 140 (eligible start-ups), section 70(2) (relocation), section 116(3)(b)/(c) (definitions of "erstwhile public sector company" and "strategic disinvestment"), and Companies Act provisions (sections 241, 242) and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The section covers: (1) change in firm constitution (retirement/death of partner); (2) succession in business by another person otherwise than by inheritance; and (3) change in shareholding of companies not being public companies, together with specified exceptions. Definitions provided within the section include subsidiary (holds more than half the nominal equity) and references for defined terms. Any additional definitions or explanatory material: Not stated in the document.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

Coverage and principal ingredients:

  • Firms (sub-section (1)): When a firm's constitution changes during a tax year (retirement or death of partner), the firm is restricted from carrying forward and setting off that portion of loss that is proportionate to the share of the retired/deceased partner to the extent it exceeds the partner's share of profits, if any, in respect of that tax year. The Act and Bill use slightly different formulations for the computation of the disallowed quantum (see Differences below).

  • Succession (sub-section (2)): Where a business or profession is succeeded by another person otherwise than by inheritance, only the person who incurred the loss can carry it forward and set it off; successors cannot claim carry-forwards.

  • Companies (sub-sections (3)-(6)): For a private company (i.e., "not being a company in which the public are substantially interested"), a change in shareholding during the tax year generally bars carry forward and set off of losses incurred in years prior to that tax year, unless specified continuity conditions are satisfied. The key continuity test is beneficial ownership of shares carrying at least 51% of voting power (variously expressed). There is a special carve-out for eligible start-ups (subject to shareholder continuity and a ten-year incidence period), and several exceptions where the restriction does not apply (death, gift to relative, certain amalgamations/demergers of foreign holding companies, resolution plans under IBC/Company Act intervention, relocation u/s 70(2), and strategic disinvestment where ultimate holding retains at least 51% voting power).

Interpretation

Legislative intent, as discernible from the text, is to prevent continuity of losses being exploited after a change in ownership/control - a common anti-avoidance objective - while preserving losses where economic continuity of ownership (51% voting power continuity or specified exceptions) exists or where special policy considerations apply (eligible start-ups, strategic disinvestment with retention of 51% voting power, insolvency/resolution processes). The text emphasizes beneficial ownership and voting power as the decisive indicia for continuity. Where silence exists on ancillary matters (procedures for proving beneficial ownership, valuation of voting power, treatment of multiple classes of shares), the document is silent: Not stated in the document.

Exceptions/Provisos

The section sets out explicit carve-outs:

  • Death of shareholder or transfer by way of gift to a relative - continuity rules do not apply.
  • Change in shareholding of an Indian subsidiary of a foreign company due to amalgamation/demerger of the foreign company where 51% of shareholders of the amalgamating/demerged foreign company are shareholders of the resulting foreign company.
  • Change consequent to a resolution plan approved under the IBC, 2016, where a reasonable opportunity to be heard was given to the jurisdictional Principal Commissioner or Commissioner.
  • Companies (and their subsidiaries and sub-subsidiaries) where Boards were suspended by the Tribunal and changes follow a Tribunal-approved resolution plan under Companies Act, 2013, with opportunity to tax authorities to be heard.
  • Change on account of relocation referred to in section 70(2) (Act cites a specific Table reference in one version; Bill uses a general reference).
  • Erstwhile public sector companies after strategic disinvestment where the ultimate holding company immediately post-disinvestment continues to hold at least 51% voting power.

Illustrations

  • Example 1 - Firm: A partner holding 25% retires in the tax year; the firm had a loss for the year. The portion of loss proportionate to the retired partner's share that exceeds any share of profits attributable to that partner for that tax year is not available for carry forward by the firm. (Numerical computation methodology: Not stated in the document.)
  • Example 2 - Private company change in shareholding: A company incurred losses in prior years. During the tax year more than 49% of beneficial voting power transfers to new persons so that continuity of >=51% beneficial voting power fails. Unless the beneficial owners who held >=51% on the loss-incurring date continue to hold >=51% at the end of the tax year, the earlier losses cannot be carried forward and set off. If the company is an eligible start-up and all shareholders who held voting shares on the loss year continue to hold them and the loss was incurred within ten years of incorporation, carry-forward is permitted.
  • Example 3 - IBC resolution: Change in shareholding pursuant to an IBC resolution plan, with tax authorities given an opportunity to be heard, will not trigger denial of carried-forward losses.

Interplay

The section expressly cross-refers to: section 140 (eligible start-ups); section 70(2) (relocation); section 116(3)(b)/(c) (definitions); Companies Act sections 241/242; Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The provisions therefore operate in tandem with corporate law mechanisms for suspension of boards, tribunal-approved resolution plans, and the tax treatment of relocated undertakings. How beneficial ownership is to be evidenced or how valuation of voting power is to be carried out is Not stated in the document. The relationship between this section and general anti-avoidance rules or other loss-restriction provisions is Not stated in the document.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers should monitor changes in firm constitution and company shareholding within tax years; loss carry-forwards can be disallowed when continuity of beneficial 51% voting power is broken. For start-ups, maintain shareholder registers and evidence that original shareholders continued to hold voting shares and ensure losses are within the ten-year window. For firms, document profit shares and any payments to retired/deceased partners to substantiate allowable carry-forwards. For succession of business, document whether succession is by inheritance; otherwise, successors cannot claim pre-existing losses.
  • Record-keeping/evidence points: Beneficial ownership records, share transfer instruments, gift deeds (to demonstrate exceptions), death certificates, tribunal/IBC/resolution plan documents (showing opportunity to be heard), board suspension orders, and relocation approvals u/s 70(2) should be preserved. Evidence of shareholding/voting power on the relevant last days of the tax years in question will be crucial. Specific documentary requirements or forms: Not stated in the document.

Key Takeaways

  • The section restricts carry forward and set off of losses when firm constitution changes or when business succession occurs other than by inheritance.
  • For companies (non-public), a 51% beneficial voting-power continuity test operates to allow prior losses to be carried forward; failure of continuity leads to denial.
  • Eligible start-ups enjoy an exception subject to shareholder continuity and a ten-year time limit for the loss incidence.
  • Several specified exceptions preserve loss carry-forwards (death, gift to relative, certain amalgamations/demergers, IBC resolution plans, tribunal-approved restructuring, relocation, strategic disinvestment with 51% retention).
  • The statute emphasizes beneficial ownership and voting power but is silent on procedural proof, valuation across share classes, and interaction with other anti-avoidance provisions.
  • Taxpayers and advisors should maintain contemporaneous evidence of shareholding and corporate events to establish entitlement to carry-forward losses where ownership changes occur.
  • Where details are absent (computation method, evidentiary procedures, effective date), the document is silent: Not stated in the document.

Differences Between the Two Texts and Practical Impact

Topic Clause 119 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 2025
Firm clause wording States firm "shall not be entitled to carry forward and set off so much of the loss proportionate to the share of retired or deceased partner as reduced by his share of profit, if any, from the firm for that tax year." States "nothing in this Chapter shall entitle the firm to have carried forward and set off so much of the loss proportionate to the share of a retired or deceased partner as exceeds his share of profits, if any, in the firm in respect of the tax year."
Practical impact - firm Difference is largely drafting nuance; both aim to restrict carry-forward of loss portion attributable to a retiring/deceased partner beyond that partner's profit share. The Act wording may read as broader in framing ("nothing in this Chapter shall entitle") but substantive effect appears the same. Computation detail remains unspecified in both. See left.
Company continuity test Requires beneficial owners who held at least 51% voting power on the last day of the loss year to continue to hold at least 51% on the last day of the tax year in which change occurs. Requires that on the last day of the tax year, shares carrying not less than 51% of the voting power were beneficially held by the person who beneficially held shares carrying not less than 51% on the last day of the year(s) in which the loss was incurred.
Practical impact - company continuity Bill's formulation ties the 51% test to the last day of the year in which loss was incurred and the last day of the tax year where change occurs - straightforward continuity test. Act wording extends to the "year or years" in which loss was incurred and may capture cumulative loss years; it highlights continuity of the person(s) who held 51% across relevant loss years. Practically, this may broaden enquiry when losses span multiple years.
Start-up carve-out Provides carve-out if all shareholders who held voting shares on last day of loss year continue to hold them on last day of change year and loss occurred within first ten years from incorporation. Similar, but cross-reference is to section 140 and the Act specifies "regardless of the change in percentage of shareholding, where the company is an eligible start up referred to in section 140," and uses similar conditions; wording close but Act emphasises "continue to hold those shares" and the ten-year period.
Relocation reference Refers to section 70(2) generally. Refers to section 70(2)(Table: Sl. No. 5.C) - a more specific cross-reference in the Act.
Strategic disinvestment  definition Cross-refers to section 116(3)(c) (Bill). Cross-refers to section 116(3)(c)(i) (Act) - more specific sub-clause reference.
Other drafting differences Minor variances in phrasing of exceptions and definition clause numbering (e.g., Bill's (6)(c) vs Act's (6)(c)). Act refines some cross-references and adds a specific table citation for relocation; otherwise substantive architecture remains consistent.

Overall practical impact: the Act text refines and slightly narrows or clarifies certain cross-references and the temporal focus (e.g., "year or years" language), but does not materially alter the core policy: protecting the tax base by denying carried losses where ownership/control continuity is broken, while allowing exceptions for policy and insolvency/tribunal-approved restructurings. Several operational questions necessary for administration (proof of beneficial ownership, treatment of compound share classes, procedural mechanism to record continuities) remain unaddressed in the texts: Not stated in the document.

Full Text:

Section 119 Carry forward and set off of losses not permissible in certain cases.

Topics

Acts Income Tax
Next ➔