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
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Maximum Marginal Rate and Surcharge for Discretionary Trusts: ITAT Special Bench Clarifies Slab-Base...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Classification of Quicklime under the Customs Tariff: CESTAT Bangalore's Reaffirmation of HSN-Based ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Reassessment Notices Post-Ashish Agarwal and TOLA: Limitation and Sanction u/ss 149 and ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Seizure, Provisional Release and Limitation: Supreme Court on the Interplay of Sections 110(2), 110A...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Prima Facie Adjustments v. Substantive Adjudication: Procedural Boundaries in Return Processing (CPC...
    Survey, Unaccounted Stock (Eye-Estimates) and the Limits of Section 130: Statutory Primacy of Sectio...
    Input Tax Credit Abuse (ITC Fraud) and Judicial Review: Delhi High Court on Natural Justice, RUDs an...
    Writ Jurisdiction and Statutory Appeal in GST Fraud Investigations: A Judicial Re-affirmation
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) Post-Amendment, Accumulated Income and the Sixth Year: Legal Interpretation, Procedura...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Form No.10B & Section 119(2)(b): Condonation of Delay in Tax Exemption Claims: Principles, Precedent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Regulatory Ambit of Import of Second-Hand Electronic Capital Goods: Classification, Exemption and Pr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 195, DTAAs and Software Licences: A Practical Framework for Withholding Tax
    Provisional Attachment under GST: Draconian Powers, Statutory Time-Bars and the Rule of Law: Interpr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 263 Revisited: Jurisdictional Boundaries Where AO Takes a Plausible View on 80G Claims
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional Release in Customs Law: Balancing Revenue Protection and Commercial Fairness - A Compara...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Conditional Re-export and Revenue Safeguards: Judicially Crafted Remedies in Customs Adjudication
    GST Limitation Regime vs Executive Notifications: Judicial Review of Time-Limit Notifications under ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Section 11(3) After Finance Act, 2022: Utilization of Accumulated Income - Deemed Income, Vesting an...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    When Can an ITAT Reopen a Decision? Distinguishing Prior Binding Precedent from Subsequent Case-Law
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment and Jurisdiction: Reconciling JAO Roles with NFAC u/ss 144B & 151A (JAO / FAO)
❯❯
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
    Discretionary trusts taxed at maximum marginal rate must have surcharge computed under slab and threshold rules, not automatically at top rate.
    For private discretionary trusts taxed at the maximum marginal rate under sections 164/167B, the term denotes the highest basic slab rate under the Finance Act, but surcharge on that tax must be computed according to the Finance Act's slab- and threshold-based surcharge provisions; if the trust's total income does not cross the statutory surcharge threshold, no surcharge is leviable despite basic tax being at the top slab rate.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Quicklime classification: impure lime falls under specific tariff heading, not high purity calcium oxide, per HSN purity standard.
    The imported material, chemically tested as impure calcium oxide (about 92.2% CaO with mineral impurities), is classifiable under Heading 2522 10 00 as Quicklime. Chapter Note 1 to Chapter 25 must be read contextually and does not disqualify quicklime from Chapter 25 where the tariff text and HSN Explanatory Notes expressly contemplate calcined quicklime. Heading 2825 is confined to chemically pure calcium oxide (approximately 98% CaO) and its residuary sub-heading cannot displace the specific Heading 2522 unless that purity threshold and absence of impurities are met.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reassessment notices: surviving-time computation under COVID-era relief and new limitation rules renders late notices time-barred.
    The court held that in transitional reassessment cases the appropriate sanctioning authority is determined by when the original three-year expiry fell within the COVID-era relief window, so approval by the ordinarily specified authority for within-three-year cases suffices; limitation is governed by a two-step surviving-time computation measured from the original notice as of the relief-window terminal date, excluding stayed periods and the time allowed to reply, and any later notice issued beyond that surviving time is time-barred under the substituted limitation regime read with the time-relief statute and the legal-fiction continuity.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Seizure of goods: six month statutory limit for issuing show cause notice is mandatory despite provisional release.
    The six month limit in Section 110(2) for issuing a show cause notice after seizure under Section 110(1) is mandatory; only a single six month extension under the first proviso is permissible. Provisional release under Section 110A does not suspend, extend or neutralise that time bar. The 2018 second proviso making the six month rule inapplicable where provisional release is ordered is a substantive change and does not validate pre amendment seizures prolonged without notice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Prima facie adjustments cannot decide debatable legal claims in return processing; contested deductions require scrutiny procedures.
    When a claimed deduction depends on timely deposit of employee welfare contributions and the legal question is debatable or pending higher adjudication, summary processing adjustments cannot be used to resolve the dispute; such matters require scrutiny or reassessment procedures and the validity of any processing-stage action must be judged by the law and facts existing at the time of processing.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Survey discovered unaccounted stock must be assessed under sections 35(6) and 73/74, not via section 130.
    Tax liability for unaccounted goods found in a survey must be determined under section 35(6) read with sections 73/74 of the GST Act; section 130 cannot be used to quantify tax or levy penalty in such cases. The statutory cross reference to sections 73/74 requires adherence to their procedural safeguards, and quantification based solely on eye estimates during survey is insufficient without proper weighment or verification.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit fraud: writ relief limited where appeals exist; hearings and raw RUDs generally suffice absent prejudice.
    The High Court held that writ jurisdiction must be exercised with restraint in complex ITC fraud matters appealable under Section 107; at least one personal hearing and provision of RUDs as collected by the Department generally suffice absent demonstrable prejudice; detailed allocation of penal liability under Sections 73/74/75(13)/122 requires adjudicatory or appellate factfinding and cannot be resolved in writ proceedings.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Writ jurisdiction limited where statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST fraud investigations; appellate forum preferred for evidentiary disputes.
    The High Court reaffirmed that writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is generally inappropriate where a statutory appeal exists for fact intensive GST investigations alleging fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit through fake invoices. Courts should confine review to jurisdictional defects or breaches of natural justice; detailed evidentiary disputes involving voluminous Relied Upon Documents, recorded statements and transaction chains are better resolved by the specialised appellate forum, which should hear appeals on merits and avoid dismissing on limitation grounds where appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Prospectivity of tax amendments: changes to accumulation rules apply from their effective date, not to prior accruals.
    Interpretation of section 11(3) concludes that, under the pre-amendment text, accumulated charitable funds could be applied in the year immediately following the five-year accumulation period; the 2022/2023 amendment removing that year was treated as prospective under the presumption against retrospective tax imposition. Separately, corrections by the Centralised Processing Centre under section 143(1) are confined to mechanistic errors and should not resolve debatable substantive questions of statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax exemption claims should favor substantive rights over mere technical filing defects when bona fide.
    Equitable application of the Condonation Power requires authorities to admit late Form No.10B filings when short delays or credible explanations would otherwise strip claimants of substantive exemption rights; procedural defects such as digital-signature technicalities must be tested against documentary e-filing evidence and substantial compliance, while administrative safeguards permit subsequent verification of the audit report.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Imported second hand MFDs meeting HSE technical criteria can be exempt from BIS registration and obtain conditional provisional release.
    Where importers produce prima facie evidence that imported second hand MFDs meet the Highly Specialized Equipment (HSE) criteria (limited units per model and physical thresholds such as weight >80 kg), those devices are exempt from compulsory BIS registration under the CRO and fall within the FTP residuary category for second hand capital goods; accordingly, provisional release may be granted on conditions (bond/guarantee and document verification) without prejudice to final adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation for software determines withholding-non exclusive copies/licenses generally not subject to TDS unless income is chargeable.
    Payments for off the shelf/shrink wrapped software or hardware embedded software that constitute a resale of a copyrighted article or a grant of a non exclusive, restricted licence for internal use do not ordinarily constitute royalty under section 9(1)(vi) or typical DTAA provisions; withholding under section 195 arises only where the non resident's receipts are chargeable to tax in India (e.g., due to a PE or transfer of substantive copyright rights), and retrospective domestic amendments cannot be used to impose past withholding obligations on payors who lacked notice of the expanded definition.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional attachment limits: fixed statutory expiry prevents re-issuance of lapsed attachment orders on same property.
    A provisional attachment under the CGST scheme automatically ceases on expiry of the statutory time limit; once it has lapsed by operation of law, tax authorities have no power to re issue or renew a fresh provisional attachment over the same property on substantially the same grounds, and any such fresh order is void. Procedural rules or executive instructions cannot be used to circumvent this statutory safeguard and must be aligned with the primary legislation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional jurisdiction cannot overturn a plausible assessment on charitable deductions where donation conditions are met.
    Tribunals held that Explanation 2 limiting CSR expenditure as a business deduction operates within the business income chapter and does not ipso facto bar claims under the donations regime; specific statutory exceptions indicate Parliament's choice to restrict only certain items. A mandatory CSR outlay does not automatically negate donation character where there is no material return, provided donee approval and documentary evidence are established. On revisional power, section 263 cannot be invoked to overturn an assessing officer's tenable, precedent backed view where enquiries were made; revision is justified only if the AO's conclusion is legally untenable or there was no inquiry.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of seized imports permitted subject to proportionate security, favouring bonds over bank guarantees before adjudication.
    Provisional release under Section 110 is permitted subject to proportionate protections: payment of duties as self-assessed; payment of a substantive portion (commonly fifty percent) of any departmental differential; and execution of enforceable bonds for the balance. Bank guarantees or cash security for speculative fines prior to adjudication are often disproportionate and may be replaced by bonds, though deliberate mis-declaration, concealment or prohibited imports justify stricter protective measures.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Conditional re-export of detained imports permitted when revenue is secured by enforceable financial guarantees and timelines.
    Courts may permit re-export of detained imports where the anticipated departmental remedy is monetary, provided the importer furnishes enforceable financial safeguards-typically a bond quantifying revenue exposure and a bank guarantee for a calibrated portion of the redetermined value-and complies with prescribed timelines; such orders are without prejudice to the Department's right to complete investigations, adjudicate, assess differential duties, and impose penalties.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Force majeure causation in GST limitation: proximate cause and mandatory council recommendation govern valid time limit extensions.
    Section 168A empowers executive modification of GST limitation periods but operates as delegated legislation subject to strict construction: valid exercise requires (i) a qualifying force majeure event, (ii) inability to complete prescribed actions, and (iii) proximate causation by that event; GST Council recommendation is a mandatory precondition and GIC substitution or post-facto ratification does not cure statutory defect.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Accumulated trust income: Tribunal rulings treat the 2022 amendment as prospective, preserving the prior six year utilisation window.
    Two Tribunal benches held that the Finance Act, 2022 amendment to the accumulation provision is prospective; accumulations made before 1 April 2022 remain governed by the prior law including the additional one year grace, and utilisation within that six year window cannot be taxed for AY 2023 24. The Tribunals relied on the presumption against retrospectivity, the Finance Bill memorandum stating an effective date of 1 April 2023, and fairness doctrines to conclude Parliament did not intend to curtail vested rights retroactively.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tribunal recall power limited: later judicial overruling alone cannot reopen finalized tax orders under review rules.
    The tribunal's power to amend is limited to rectifying a mistake apparent from the record existing at the time of the original order or to taking into account contemporaneous binding precedent not placed before it; a subsequent overruling or clarification by a superior court cannot alone justify recall, in light of the explanatory bar in Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC and related authorities.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Concurrent jurisdiction between JAO and faceless authorities affirmed; JAO may initiate reassessment followed by faceless assessment.
    The faceless scheme and RMS produce information that may be surfaced to the JAO, permitting the JAO to conduct the pre-notice inquiry and form satisfaction to issue a notice initiating reassessment; thereafter records may be transmitted for faceless assessment via automated allocation, embodying a two-stage model that preserves both JAO initiation authority and central faceless assessment.

    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 149 "Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      3 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 149 Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

        At a Glance

        Clause 149 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) provides specified deductions for co-operative societies in computing total income. It enumerates categories of allowed deductions (business profits for specified activities, certain small-amount business profits, inter-co-operative income, letting of godowns, limited interest/house property income) and conditions relating to voting rights for societies engaged in labour/fishing activities. The provision affects co-operative societies (primary and others); effective date or commencement is Not stated in the document.

        Background & Scope

        Statutory hooks: Clause 149 sits in the chapter dealing with "Deductions in respect of certain incomes" in the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The clause is intended to grant specified tax deductions to co-operative societies on certain classes of income. The text provides coverage of the types of co-operative societies and activities that qualify, thresholds for small-value activities, and special treatment for income from investments in other co-operative societies. Clause 149(6) supplies three definitions: "consumers' co-operative society", "co-operative bank" and "primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank". No further definitions (e.g., of "primary society" or "federal co-operative society") are provided in the clause. Any wider contextual definitions or commencement/notification details are Not stated in the document.

        Statutory Provision Mode

        Text & Scope

        Clause 149(1) establishes that if the gross total income of an assessee that is a co-operative society includes income of the kinds listed in sub-section (2), the sums specified in sub-section (2) shall be allowed as deductions in computing total income "in accordance with and subject to the provisions of this section."

        Clause 149(2) enumerates six categories of deductible sums:

        • Clause 149(2)(a): For co-operative societies engaged in specified activities (banking/providing credit to members; cottage industry; marketing of agricultural produce of members; purchase of agricultural implements/seeds/livestock for supply to members; processing without aid of power of members' agricultural produce; collective disposal of members' labour; fishing or allied activities), the whole of the profits and gains attributable to any one or more of such activities are deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(b): For a primary society supplying milk, oilseeds, fruits or vegetables raised by its members to a federal co-operative society, Government/local authority, or specified Government companies/corporations, the whole of such business profits and gains are deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(c): For co-operative societies engaged in activities not specified in (a) or (b), an amount of profits and gains attributable to such activities is deductible up to prescribed small thresholds-one lakh rupees for consumers' co-operative societies and fifty thousand rupees for others.
        • Clause 149(2)(d): Income by way of interest or dividends from investments with any other co-operative society is wholly deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(e): Income derived from letting of godowns or warehouses used for storage, processing, or facilitating marketing of commodities is wholly deductible.
        • Clause 149(2)(f): For co-operative societies that are not housing societies, urban consumers' societies, transport societies, or societies performing manufacturing with aid of power, if gross total income does not exceed twenty thousand rupees, the amounts of income by way of interest on securities or any income from house property chargeable u/s 20 are deductible.

        Interpretation

        The clause adopts a categorical approach: specific activities enumerated in (2)(a) and (2)(b) receive full deduction of attributable business profits and gains. The drafting implies legislative intent to fiscally favour co-operative activities with social, agricultural or rural development character and primary cooperative supply chains. Clause 149(2)(c) recognises incidental or ancillary activities by permitting a capped deduction, signalling that only small-scale non-core business profits receive preferential tax treatment.

        Clause 149(4) provides that deductions under sub-section (1) relating to (2)(a), (b), (c) or sub-section (3) shall be allowed with reference to income after reducing the deduction u/s 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, if the assessee is also entitled to that deduction - indicating an order of computation to avoid double advantage. The clause thereby contemplates interaction with pre-existing industrial/infrastructure related deductions (section 80-IA) and establishes netting off before applying cooperative deductions.

        Exceptions/Provisos

        Clause 149(3) conditions application of the sub-section dealing with collective disposal of labour and fishing/allied activities on the society's rules restricting voting rights to specified classes: (i) individuals who contribute labour or carry on fishing/allied activities; (ii) co-operative credit societies which provide financial assistance; (iii) the State Government. This is a membership/control test to ensure genuine member-based governance.

        Clause 149(2)(f) carves out several categories of societies (housing, urban consumers' societies, transport, manufacturing with power) from the small gross-income relief. The relief under (f) only applies if gross total income does not exceed twenty thousand rupees.

        Illustrations

        • Example 1: A primary milk co-operative supplying milk to a federal co-operative society has business profits of Rs. 500,000 attributable to that activity - under Clause 149(2)(b), the whole amount would be deductible when computing total income.
        • Example 2: A consumers' co-operative retail society derives Rs. 120,000 profit from an ancillary non-specified activity - under Clause 149(2)(c)(i), only Rs. 100,000 is deductible; the remaining Rs. 20,000 is taxable.
        • Example 3: A fishing co-operative's rules permit voting by outside investors - if voting is not restricted to classes listed in Clause 149(3), the special deduction for fishing activities under (2)(a)(vii) would not apply. (Whether this exact circumstance occurs is a fact; the clause makes the control condition explicit.)

        Interplay

        Clause 149 explicitly interacts with section 80-IA (Income-tax Act, 1961) by requiring deduction under 80-IA to be reduced first where applicable. Clause 149(6)(b) ties definitions of "co-operative bank" and "primary agricultural credit society" to Part V of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. Other cross-references (e.g., section 20 for house property) are internal to the tax code. No other Rules, Notifications or Circulars are referenced in the clause. Any further interaction with other deductions or eligibility conditions outside the clause is Not stated in the document.

        Differences between Section 149 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and Clause 149 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version)

        • Cross-references to other deductions: Clause 149(4) (Bill) expressly refers to reduction of deduction u/s 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, whereas Section 149(4) (Act) refers generically to "section 138".
          • Practical impact: The enacted provision substitutes a different cross-reference (section 138) which likely reflects renumbering/restructuring in the revised Act; taxpayers and practitioners must verify which contemporary provision (section 138) corresponds to former section 80-IA relief before applying the interaction rule.
        • Wording on application condition for certain societies: Clause 149(3) states "provisions of sub-section (2) shall apply when the rules and bye-laws... restrict the voting rights to the following classes of members," while Section 149(3) in the Act states the deduction in sub-section (1) applies only when the rules restrict voting rights to specified classes.
          • Practical impact: The Bill framed the condition as application of sub-section (2); the Act frames it as a condition for deduction under sub-section (1). Substance appears the same, but the enacted text is marginally clearer that the deduction itself is conditional - minimal practical effect except for drafting clarity in litigation or interpretation where reliance on the exact statutory linkage could arise.
        • Definitions: Clause 149(6) in the Bill contains express definitions for "consumers' co-operative society", "co-operative bank" and "primary co-operative agricultural and rural development bank". Section 149 in the Act (Document 1) does not include clause (6) or these definitions.
          • Practical impact: The Bill's inclusion of definitions would assist interpretation; their absence in the enacted section may require cross-reference to other statutes (e.g., Banking Regulation Act) or general interpretation principles. This increases potential ambiguity for terms used in the enacted section.
        • Subsection numbering and internal references: Clause 149(3) refers to "provisions of sub-section (2)"; the Act's corresponding subsection reference is to sub-section (1) in one place, and the Act elsewhere has slightly different cross-references (e.g., section 20 in Act corresponds to "section 20" in Bill).
          • Practical impact: Potentially material if internal references were misaligned; practitioners must confirm which sub-section each condition attaches to when applying the enacted text.

        Practical Implications

        • Compliance/risk areas: Co-operative societies must allocate and document profits attributable to qualifying activities (particularly where societies undertake both specified and non-specified activities) to substantiate claims under (2)(a)/(b)/(c). For fishing/labour co-operatives, bye-laws restricting voting are a precondition - compliance requires careful governance documentation and possible amendment of bye-laws where necessary.
        • Interaction with other deductions: Entities claiming both section 80-IA and Clause 149 relief must compute netting as provided; failure to reduce the 80-IA deduction first may invite adjustment. Practitioners should keep explicit working papers showing order of deductions.
        • Record-keeping/evidence: Maintain minutes, registered bye-laws, membership rolls and voting rights records to demonstrate eligibility under Clause 149(3); maintain segmented accounting to show profits attributable to each activity and inter-cooperative investments for (2)(d); keep leases and purpose documentation for godown letting under (2)(e).

        Key Takeaways

        • Clause 149 provides targeted, often full, deduction of profits for co-operative societies engaged in specified agricultural, credit, cottage, marketing, processing (without power), labour-collective and fishing activities.
        • Primary societies supplying agricultural produce to federal co-operatives, government bodies or specified public companies receive full deduction for that business.
        • Non-specified activities qualify only up to modest monetary caps (Rs. 1,00,000 for consumers' co-operatives; Rs. 50,000 for others).
        • Income from investments in other co-operative societies and income from letting godowns used for marketing are fully deductible.
        • Special control/governance conditions apply for labour and fishing co-operatives; bye-laws restricting voting to specified classes are a precondition.
        • Deductions under Clause 149 must be computed after reducing deduction u/s 80-IA where applicable.
        • Definitions for key terms are included in Clause 149(6), aiding interpretation, but other definitional gaps remain and are Not stated in the document.

         


        Full Text:

        Section 149 Deduction in respect of income of co-operative societies.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax