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
    Doctrine of Reasonable Cause in Tax Penalties : Clause 470 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Voluntary Disclosure and Penalty Waiver under Indian Tax Law : Clause 469 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance with TDCAN/TAN Requirements : Clause 468 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Penalty Provision for PAN/Aadhaar Non-Compliance in Indian Tax Law : Clause 467 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for deterrence against non-cooperation with tax authorities : Clause 466 of Incom...
    Procedural Defaults and Penalties in Indian Tax Law : Clause 465 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Ensuring Compliance Among Tax-Exempt Entities : Clause 464 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Professionals(i.e. Accountant, Marchant Banker, Registered Valuer) Accountability under Indian Incom...
    Enforcement of Information Disclosure in Cross-Border Transactions : Clause 462 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-Filing and Incorrect Filing of TDS/TCS Statements : Clause 461 of the Inc...
    Enforcement of Reporting Obligations by a non-resident having liaison office : Clause 460 of Income ...
    Penalties for Reporting Non-Compliance by Resident constituent entity of an international group unde...
    Legal Implications of Non-Compliance with Reporting Requirements : Clause 458 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Strengthening Transfer Pricing Enforcement : Clause 457 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 271...
    Compliance and Penalty Mechanisms for Investment Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 456 of the Inco...
    Penalties for Inaccurate Financial Reporting under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 455 of the Income ...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance in Financial Transaction Reporting : Clause 454 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-compliant Loan Repayments in India's Income Tax Law : Clause 453 of the I...
    Mandatory Electronic Payments and Penalty Regimes : Clause 452 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
    Evolving Penalty Regimes for Monetary Transaction Violations : Clause 451 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
❯❯
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
    Reasonable cause defense protects taxpayers from penalties for bona fide, non culpable defaults and encourages documented compliance.
    Clause 470 creates an exception to specified penalty provisions: no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure. It functions as a non obstante provision covering enumerated sections, shifts the burden of proof to the taxpayer, and is aimed primarily at bona fide procedural or technical lapses rather than deliberate violations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Voluntary disclosure and penalty waiver enable administrative relief when pre detection disclosure, cooperation and payment conditions are met.
    Clause 469 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to reduce or waive penalties under section 439 where a taxpayer has made a full and true voluntary disclosure before detection, cooperated in assessment and paid or arranged payment of tax or interest; it includes a deeming rule for full disclosure, prior approval safeguards for high value cases, a bar on multiple reliefs, a genuine hardship route with recorded reasons, a twelve month disposal limit, opportunity to be heard, and finality of orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to quote TDCAN/TAN: discretionary fixed sanctions apply for non compliance and knowingly false quoting.
    Clause 468 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed monetary penalty for failure to comply with Section 397 and for quoting a false Tax Deduction and Collection Account Number in prescribed documents where the person knows or believes it to be false, making the penalty discretionary and imposing a mens rea requirement for false quoting while not expressly providing for a statutory opportunity of being heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    PAN/Aadhaar compliance: new per-default penalty regime distinguishes intentional false quoting from strict liability omissions and extends responsible person liability.
    Clause 467 establishes a per-default penalty regime for non-compliance with section 262, differentiating intentional false PAN/Aadhaar quoting-which requires proof of knowledge or belief-from omissions treated as strict liability, and extends liability to persons responsible for ensuring correct quoting/authentication; it emphasizes authentication and digital e KYC integration while remaining silent on express procedural safeguards such as the opportunity to be heard, creating potential due process and transitional issues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non cooperation: new provision allows senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty without explicit hearing safeguards.
    Clause 466 empowers specified senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty for failure to comply with section 254, mirroring prior penalty structure in authority and capped quantum but omitting express procedural safeguards such as an opportunity of being heard, defences like reasonable cause, and a requirement to record reasons, thereby raising concerns about procedural fairness and consistency in imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for procedural defaults: fixed and daily fines, capped to tax collectible, with delegated authority to impose them.
    Clause 465 creates a penalty regime for procedural non compliance under the Income Tax Bill, 2025: a fixed penalty for discrete defaults, a daily penalty for continuing defaults, a cap tying certain penalties to the amount of tax deductible or collectible, and specified authorities empowered to impose penalties; it broadens the definition of income tax authority and updates cross references to the restructured Bill, while notably omitting an explicit provision requiring an opportunity to be heard before penalty imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty regime for failure to furnish prescribed statements strengthens compliance under tax exempt reporting obligations.
    A statutory penalty regime targets failure by specified research institutions and charitable funds to furnish prescribed documents, statements, or certificates within prescribed timeframes; penalties fall within a prescribed band and are imposed at the discretion of the Assessing Officer, operating as a civil compliance measure alongside general procedural safeguards and requiring stakeholders to update compliance processes to align with re referenced substantive sections.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Professional accountability: penalty for furnishing incorrect information in professional reports or certificates under the new income tax bill.
    Clause 463 imposes a strict-liability penalty regime on accountants, merchant bankers and registered valuers for furnishing incorrect information in any report or certificate under the Act or rules. It prescribes a fixed per-instance monetary penalty and empowers the Assessing Officer, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals) to impose the penalty upon satisfaction that incorrect information was furnished. The clause updates definitional references for valuers, omits an explicit definition of "accountant," and operates without prejudice to other civil or criminal consequences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish information: fixed sanction for inaccurate or missing cross-border disclosure, raising proportionality concerns.
    Clause 462 penalises any person required to furnish information under section 397(3)(d) who fails to supply such information or furnishes inaccurate information; the Assessing Officer may impose a fixed monetary penalty, the provision mirrors Section 271I in structure and intent, lacks an express reasonable-cause defence or gradation of penalty, and raises interpretative issues as to the scope of "inaccurate information," procedural safeguards, and proportionality in enforcement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: discretionary fines with short grace period where tax is paid and statement filed promptly.
    Clause 461 creates a penalty for failure to deliver statements under section 397(3)(b) or for furnishing incorrect information, authorising the Assessing Officer to impose a discretionary monetary penalty equivalent in range to the existing Section 271H. Clause 461(2) exempts penalty where tax, fee and interest are paid to the Central Government and the statement is filed within a short grace period, thereby balancing deterrence with relief for prompt substantive compliance while leaving procedural safeguards and definitions, such as "incorrect information," unclearly specified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to submit statements may be imposed by the assessing officer as a daily or capped sanction, discretion preserved.
    Clause 460 permits the Assessing Officer to impose discretionary monetary penalties on any person required to furnish a statement under section 505 for failure to file within the prescribed period, using a two-tier structure of a daily sanction for short-term delay and a capped penalty for longer default, with applicability dependent on the scope of the parent reporting obligation and subject to the general procedural and appellate framework of the tax law.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reporting penalties: new clause preserves escalating daily fines and a large fixed penalty for inaccurate international tax reports.
    Clause 459 establishes a tiered penalty regime under section 511 for reporting entities: daily penalties for failure to furnish reports, daily penalties for failure to produce information after the allowed period, an escalated daily penalty if default continues after service of a penalty order, and a substantial fixed penalty for furnishing inaccurate information or failing to correct known or discovered inaccuracies. The prescribed authority under section 511 is empowered to impose these penalties, and the clause mirrors Section 271GB in quantum and triggers while raising issues about reasonable cause relief and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to report transfers of management or control triggers significant compliance and enforcement consequences.
    Clause 458 creates a penalty for failure by an Indian concern to furnish information or documents under section 506, authorising the prescribed income-tax authority to impose either a transaction-value-based penalty where a transaction effects a direct or indirect transfer of management or control, or a fixed monetary penalty otherwise, and otherwise mirrors the substantive framework and enforcement objectives of Section 271GA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation penalty: failure to furnish documents leads to transaction value based penalties and enforcement by tax authorities.
    Failure to furnish prescribed transfer pricing information or documentation for international or specified domestic transactions triggers a transaction value based penalty under Clause 457, enforceable by the Assessing Officer, authorised Transfer Pricing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals); the clause ties this enforcement directly to the obligations in section 171(2) and raises interpretive issues concerning the meaning of failure, computation of transaction value, overlap with other penalties, and the availability of a reasonable cause defence.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: eligible investment funds face a fixed sanction under the bill; authority may impose it.
    Clause 456 imposes a fixed penalty where an eligible investment fund fails to furnish required statements or information within the prescribed time; the prescribed income-tax authority may direct payment of the fixed sanction. The reporting deadline is set by the substantive eligibility reporting provision; the penalty is discretionary rather than automatic, lacks a graded scale, and does not expressly specify procedural safeguards such as criteria for discretion or an opportunity to be heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for inaccurate financial reporting imposes institutional and account-holder liability while enabling recovery of penalties from account holders.
    Clause 455 mandates penalties for persons required to furnish statements of financial transactions or reportable accounts for providing inaccurate information or failing to meet due diligence obligations, and imposes an additional per-account penalty on reporting financial institutions where inaccuracies stem from account-holder-supplied false information; reporting institutions may recover such additional penalties from the responsible account holders by direct recovery or retention of funds, with imposition directed by the prescribed income-tax authority and substantive continuity with the former Section 271FAA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish financial transaction statements - escalating daily sanctions for continued non-compliance after notice.
    Clause 454 creates a statutory penalty regime for failure to furnish a statement of financial transaction or reportable account, prescribing a daily penalty accruing from the date the filing deadline lapses, with an escalated daily rate where default continues after a formal notice, and vesting discretionary imposition authority in the income-tax authority subject to procedural safeguards and rights to challenge.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non-compliant loan repayments: Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to the amount repaid for procedural breaches.
    Clause 453 permits the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to any loan, deposit or specified advance repaid in contravention of section 188, applying to all persons and covering repayments made by non-transparent modes. The provision creates strict liability based on procedural breach rather than mens rea, centralizes enforcement with the Assessing Officer, and omits an explicit reasonable-cause defence, raising potential interpretative and transitional issues regarding the scope of specified advances and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic payment mandate triggers daily penalties for non compliance unless a taxpayer proves good and sufficient reason.
    Clause 452 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed per day monetary penalty for failure to provide prescribed electronic modes of payment under section 187, subject to a saving where the person proves good and sufficient reason for the failure; the provision mirrors the former section 271DB framework but streamlines authority and lacks detailed procedural guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary transaction penalty: discretion to impose a penalty equal to prohibited receipt unless good and sufficient reasons are proved.
    Clause 451 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received in contravention of section 186 unless the recipient proves good and sufficient reasons; the provision emphasises proportionality, vests discretion in enforcement, omits explicit procedural safeguards and mens rea, and mirrors the substantive penalty quantum and defence in the earlier statutory regime while differing in statutory tone and procedural concision.

    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 187 "Acceptance of payment through prescribed electronic modes." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      4 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 187 Acceptance of payment through prescribed electronic modes.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The texts reproduced are (1) Section 187 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (final statute text) and (2) Clause 187 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (legislative bill text). Both provisions require persons carrying on business or profession to provide facilities for accepting payments through prescribed electronic modes where total sales, turnover or gross receipts exceed fifty crore rupees in the immediately preceding tax year. The requirement affects taxpayers (businesses/professionals) above the threshold and, indirectly, tax administration and payments infrastructure providers. Effective date or commencement is: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: The provision appears as Clause/Section 187 under the heading "MODE OF PAYMENT IN CERTAIN CASES, ETC." in the Income Tax Bill/Act, 2025. Context: the provision mandates acceptance of payments by certain electronic modes for persons carrying on business or profession crossing a monetary threshold. Coverage: persons carrying on business or profession whose total sales, turnover or gross receipts exceed fifty crore rupees during the immediately preceding tax year. Definitions/explanations: the texts do not define "electronic modes", "prescribed electronic modes", "person", "business", "profession", "total sales, turnover or gross receipts" or how multiple businesses are aggregated. Not stated in the document.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Coverage: The provision applies to "every person" who is "carrying on business or profession" and whose total sales, turnover or gross receipts in such business or profession exceeds fifty crore rupees during the immediately preceding tax year. The obligation is to "provide facility for accepting payment, through electronic modes as may be prescribed, in addition to other electronic modes, if any, being provided by him." Ingredients/elements: (i) actor - every person carrying on business or profession; (ii) threshold - total sales, turnover or gross receipts > Rs. 50 crore in the immediately preceding tax year; (iii) duty - to provide facility for accepting payment via prescribed electronic modes (in addition to any other electronic modes already offered). The triggering period for the threshold is the "immediately preceding tax year." The nature of the duty is operational (to provide facility), not merely to enable or permit such modes. The phrase "as may be prescribed" indicates that specific electronic modes and operational prescriptions will be specified by subordinate legislation/notifications.

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent and interpretive principles indicated by the text: The provision aims to expand and standardise electronic payment acceptance among larger businesses/professionals, likely to enhance traceability, digitisation of the economy and tax compliance. The use of "shall" denotes a mandatory obligation. The phrase "in addition to other electronic modes, if any, being provided by him" suggests that the prescribed modes are minimum required channels and do not supplant existing electronic payment facilities. The inclusion of "as may be prescribed" signals reliance on delegated legislation for specifying the exact electronic modes and perhaps technical or procedural standards. The text implicitly contemplates an objective monetary threshold to capture large entities; the reference to the "immediately preceding tax year" suggests retrospective application based on the prior year's turnover to determine obligation in the current year.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs, thresholds, conditions: The provision contains the threshold (Rs. 50 crore) as the sole conditional trigger. No provisos, exemptions, de minimis exceptions, sectoral carve-outs or special cases are provided in the text. Not stated in the document: specific exemptions (e.g., for certain classes of persons), transitional relief, penalties for non-compliance, timelines for implementation, technological standards, or enforcement mechanisms.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A manufacturing company with total sales of Rs. 60 crore in FY 2023-24 (immediately preceding tax year) is required in the current year to provide facilities to accept payments through the electronic modes prescribed by the competent authority, in addition to any electronic modes it already offers. (This example is a direct application of the text; no additional factual details beyond turnover threshold are assumed.)
      • Example 2: An individual architect operating a practice with gross receipts of Rs. 55 crore in the immediately preceding tax year falls within the provision and must provide the prescribed electronic payment facilities. (This applies the provision to a "profession" where the Act text includes "profession".)

      Interplay

      Interaction with Rules/Notifications/Circulars: The text expressly contemplates subordinate prescriptions ("as may be prescribed" / "as prescribed") for the electronic modes. Not stated in the document: which Rule-making power is being invoked, the particular authority tasked with prescription, or any existing Notifications/Circulars that supplement this provision. Therefore, the detailed modalities, definitions of prescribed modes, certification or compliance processes will depend on later rulemaking or administrative guidance. Not stated in the document: interaction with other provisions of the Income-tax Act relating to payment mechanisms, penalties, or information reporting obligations; any cross-reference to goods and services tax or Reserve Bank of India regulations concerning payment systems.

      Comparison: Differences between the Two Texts and Practical Impact

      Observed textual differences between Document 1 (Section 187, Income-tax Act, 2025) and Document 2 (Clause 187, Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version):

      • Wording parity: Both texts are substantively identical in operative content (requirement to provide facility for accepting payment through prescribed electronic modes where person carries on business/profession and exceeds fifty crore rupees in preceding tax year). The Act version begins with "Every person shall provide facility for accepting payment, through electronic modes as may be prescribed, in addition to other electronic modes, if any, being provided by him, where--" while the Bill version uses "through electronic modes as prescribed, in addition to other electronic modes, if any, being provided by him". This is a minor stylistic difference (use of "as may be prescribed" vs "as prescribed").
      • Scope wording: Bill version specifies "such person is carrying on business" in clause (a) whereas the Act version uses "such person is carrying on business or profession" in clause (a). The Bill's main text already begins "Every person shall provide..." and its clause (a) only lists "carrying on business". However the Bill's prefatory sentence earlier in Document 2 (immediately above the clause text) refers to "carrying on business" (singular) and clause (b) uses "in such business". The Act text explicitly includes "profession" in the main sentence and clause (a).
        • Practical impact: the Act version more clearly extends the requirement to persons carrying on a profession as well as business; if the Bill version (Old Version) omitted "profession" in a clause that otherwise might have included it in the main sentence, it could create ambiguity whether professionals are covered. Given the two documents here, the Act clarifies inclusion of "profession".
      • Formality: Document 1 is labelled as Section 187 of the Act, and Document 2 as Clause 187 of the Bill - Old Version.
        • Practical impact: transition from Bill to Act may include minor drafting refinements; stakeholders should rely on the enacted Act text for legal obligations.
      • Annotations: Document 2 includes the explanatory note "Clause 187 of the Bill seeks to provide for accepting payment through prescribed electronic modes." Document 1 does not include that note.
        • Practical impact: the Bill commentary assists legislative intent readers, but does not alter operative obligations.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Entities whose previous-year turnover exceeds Rs. 50 crore must ensure they offer the mandated prescribed electronic payment modes. Risk areas include: failure to adopt the prescribed modes (legal non-compliance), misidentifying the relevant turnover period, and ambiguity over aggregation rules for multiple businesses or group entities. Not stated in the document: penalties or enforcement consequences for non-compliance.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points: While the provision does not specify record-keeping, practical compliance will require documentary evidence of offered payment facilities (e.g., invoices showing accepted modes, bank or payment service provider contracts, website screenshots, receipts). Not stated in the document: specific records that must be maintained or produced to authorities.

      Key Takeaways

      • The provision mandates facility to accept payments through prescribed electronic modes for persons carrying on business or profession exceeding Rs. 50 crore turnover in the immediately preceding tax year.
      • The Act text clarifies inclusion of "profession" alongside "business"; the Bill (Old Version) text was less explicit in one clause, creating potential ambiguity later clarified in the Act.
      • The obligation is mandatory ("shall") and requires provision of prescribed modes in addition to existing electronic options.
      • Key operational details (which modes are prescribed, technical standards, timelines, exemptions, penalties) are not contained in the provision and await subordinate legislation or administrative guidance.
      • Compliance will depend on accurate turnover calculation for the immediately preceding tax year and implementation of prescribed payment channels; documentation evidencing compliance will be important though not specified.
      • Stakeholders should monitor rulemaking and notifications to determine precise modalities and timelines; until such prescriptions are issued, the obligation's practical operation remains partly indeterminate.

      Full Text:

      Section 187 Acceptance of payment through prescribed electronic modes.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax