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
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 ✕
🔎 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
    Jurisdictional Prerequisites for Initiating Reassessment u/s 148: Non-Depoist of TDS by the Employer
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revisiting the Scope of "Record" u/s 263: Embracing Subsequent Records
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Record": Revisiting the Scope of Revision Powers u/s 264 and Rectification of Mistake ...
    The Doctrine of Natural Justice in GST Proceedings: A Case Study on Show Cause Notice u/s 74"
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) and the Concept of "Plant" under GST: Supreme Court
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: High Court's Stance on Quashing Show Cause Notices
    Case LawsCustoms
    Inordinate Delay in Adjudication: Upholding the Principles of Natural Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Re-Assessment Notices Issued During COVID-19 Lockdown
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Mineral Rights Regime: The Supreme Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Assessment Regime: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Evidentiary Value of Statements Recorded During Income Tax Surveys: A Judicial Analysis
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment: Ensuring Compliance with Statutory Provisions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Faceless Assessment Mechanism: Jurisdictional Limits in Income Tax Proceedings
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Notices for AY 2013-14: Upholding the Doctrine of Limitation
    Principles of Tax Fairness and Mens Rea: Quashes Penalty for Mere Technical Errors
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Mandatory Timelines: A Thorough Examination of the Income Tax Assessment Order Nullific...
    Expiry of E-Way Bill AND Mens Rea: Technical Violation Alone Insufficient for Penalty Imposition
    Maintainability of Appeals: High Court Upholds Strict Interpretation of Limitation Provisions in GST...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Stay of Tax Demand: Interpreting the Discretionary Power u/s 220(6) of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting "Technical Services" under Tax Treaties: A Comprehensive Analysis
❯❯
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
    Jurisdictional prerequisite: notice in the name of a deceased person invalidates reassessment initiation under Section 148.
    A notice under Section 148 issued in the name of a deceased person is a jurisdictional defect because a valid notice to the correct person is a condition precedent to reopening an assessment; legal representatives have no statutory duty to intimate death; where salary tax has been deducted at source, reassessment cannot be pursued against the deceased or their representatives, and employer non-deposit of TDS does not create an outstanding demand against the assessee or their legal representatives.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revisional power: Commissioner may consider subsequent records available at time of examination in tax proceedings.
    The Court construed the Commissioner's revisional power to permit consideration of all materials relating to the proceeding that are available at the time of his examination, including documents and valuation reports that came on the file after the assessment order; the Explanation to the provision was read as clarificatory, giving an inclusive meaning to "record" rather than restricting it to what the Assessing Officer had when passing the assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision powers under section 264: Commissioner must consider expanded record and rehear revision petitions on merits.
    The Court held that the Commissioner must consider a revision petition on its merits and that the term record in revision proceedings extends beyond the return and assessment order to include material from other sources and prior assessments. It emphasised consistency in treatment of continuing transactions and required the Principal Commissioner to take into account all relevant materials, identify any apparent mistakes, afford a personal hearing, and pass a reasoned order within a short timeframe.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tax proceedings: show cause notices must allege fraud or concealment before enhanced recovery is invoked.
    The court quashed the enhanced-provision show cause notice for failing to allege the essential elements of fraud, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts and held that the enhanced regime may be invoked only when the adjudicating authority is prima facie satisfied of those elements and records that satisfaction in the notice; absent such express allegations the proceedings are without jurisdiction though fresh proceedings may be initiated with a proper notice.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Plant classification under GST: functionality test determines ITC eligibility for buildings serving special technical requirements.
    The expression plant or machinery in Section 17(5)(d) of the CGST Act must be interpreted by reference to functionality rather than by equating it with the statutory definition of "plant and machinery." A building qualifies as a plant for ITC purposes if, on the facts, it was planned and constructed to serve the assessee's special technical or operational requirements. The functionality test is fact-specific and requires case-by-case analysis of the building's role in the assessee's business.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication bars further proceedings on stale show cause notices absent a reasonable explanation.
    The court found the delay from 2008 to 2021 inordinate and unexplained, concluding the respondents did not provide a reasonable explanation; the delayed transfer to the call book without intimation breached statutory intimation requirements, and established precedent limits reliance on higher authority to excuse gross unexplained delays in adjudication of show cause notices.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Inordinate delay in adjudication undermines procedural fairness and bars continuation of prolonged, unexplained proceedings.
    The court found that prolonged, unexplained delay in adjudicating a show cause notice breached procedural fairness and natural justice, causing irretrievable prejudice by impairing evidence preservation and business planning. Delay attributable to the revenue authorities, contrary to Tribunal directions for timely disposal, rendered continuance of proceedings unsustainable and emphasized the necessity of justifying delay and ensuring timely adjudication.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Pandemic relief legislation upheld: re-assessment notices issued during lockdown remain valid despite later procedural rule.
    The court interpreted the pandemic relief legislation as providing comprehensive relief that extended to procedural obligations in force at the time of issuance, not confined solely to extensions of time. It applied the principle that statutes operate prospectively and concluded the later-introduced procedural provision does not apply retrospectively to invalidate earlier-issued re-assessment notices, limiting its analysis to the validity of issuance and not the merits of re-assessment proceedings.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Central legislative competence over mineral regulation affirmed; royalties characterised as compensation for resource depletion, limiting state levies.
    The Court concluded that the central legislative framework occupies the field of mineral regulation and that royalties are compensation for depletion of state-owned natural resources, not conventional taxes; consequently the Centre may impose such levies while States remain constrained from imposing royalties in the nature of compensation that would encroach on the Centre's exclusive regulatory domain.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment mechanism requires reassessment steps to follow a centralized faceless procedure, otherwise territorial officer lacks jurisdiction.
    The Scheme framed under the enabling provision must be read to include preliminary proceedings linked to reassessment, so that reassessment initiation and related steps follow the faceless mechanism; concurrent exercise of territorial and faceless functions would undermine the Scheme's purpose and render steps taken outside the faceless protocol inconsistent with the statutory framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Evidentiary value of survey statements: survey disclosures lack conclusive weight and require independent corroboration.
    Statements recorded during a tax survey are permissive and not taken on oath, so they are not conclusive evidence by themselves; they cannot be treated as inherently incriminating material to justify reopening assessments or making additions without independent corroboration, and must be recorded free of coercion in line with administrative instructions and judicial precedents.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless assessment jurisdiction: JAO lacked authority under the statutory faceless procedure, invalidating improperly issued notices.
    The court determined that reassessment notices and related proceedings were inconsistent with the statutory faceless assessment framework because they were issued without following the prescribed allocation of jurisdiction and procedural sequence under the faceless mechanism; administrative orders purportedly exempting cases were not read to displace the statutory requirements and earlier precedent interpreting the faceless provisions was applied.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Faceless Assessment: statutory scheme governs jurisdiction and extends to central and international taxation proceedings.
    The court analysed Section 151A read with Sections 144B and 148A and held that administrative instructions dated March 31, 2021 and September 6, 2021 issued under section 119 apply only to assessment orders and do not extend to proceedings under Sections 148A and 148; those instructions cannot be read into the scheme notified on March 29, 2022. The mandatory faceless procedure under Sections 144B and 151A applies to notices and proceedings, including central charges and international taxation charges, and notices issued outside that mechanism fall outside the statutory jurisdictional framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of limitation prevents revival of lapsed reassessment powers; administrative instructions cannot "travel back in time."
    The court held that when the right to reopen assessment had already lapsed under the pre amended limitation regime, subsequent amendments or administrative instructions could not revive that right; administrative attempts to "travel back in time" and extend limitation were invalid, assessees retain the defence of limitation, and pandemic era notifications did not cover years whose limitation had already expired.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement in tax penalties: technical errors without intent cannot justify penalty imposition under GST compliance.
    Requirement of mens rea for imposition of tax penalties is central where e Way Bill compliance is questioned. Mere procedural or timing inconsistencies, without evidence of intent to evade tax and where valid tax invoices accompany the goods and tax has been charged, do not justify penal action. Authorities must establish culpable intent with cogent reasoning and comply with procedural and natural justice safeguards before imposing penalties.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Mandatory timelines under Section 144C require assessments to be completed within the prescribed month after DRP direction, else invalid.
    Once the DRP framed directions, the Assessing Officer was obliged to complete the assessment in conformity with those directions within one month from the end of the month in which the DRP's direction was served; service by uploading the DRP directive on the ITBA portal constitutes valid service for computing that period. The procedure does not envisage further involvement of the Transfer Pricing Officer once the DRP's direction is issued and an order under the transfer pricing provision has been remitted to the AO.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Mens rea requirement: technical expiry of an e way bill alone cannot justify a tax penalty without intent to evade.
    The court held that a purely technical lapse in E Way Bill formalities - where goods were otherwise covered by two e invoices and two E Way Bills and there was no dispute on consignor, consignee or goods - does not demonstrate the mens rea necessary to impose a penalty under the tax penal provision; authorities' focus on the expired E Way Bill alone was legally insufficient given documentary explanations and absence of intent to evade tax.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Exclusion of Limitation Act: GST Act's specific appellate time limits operate as a self contained code, barring general extensions.
    The court analysed whether the GST Act's appellate limitation regime operates as a complete code excluding the general Limitation Act. It applied the principle that fiscal statutes with detailed procedural and temporal rules are to be strictly construed, treating the special statute's limitation provision as implying exclusion of the Limitation Act's extension mechanism, and emphasised policy aims of expeditious dispute resolution, revenue certainty and administrative finality.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Assessing Officer discretion in granting stay of tax demand cannot be rigidly constrained by administrative OMs, requiring case specific consideration.
    The Assessing Officer's discretionary power under section 220(6) to grant stay of tax demand is not fettered by CBDT Office Memorandums; those OMs are administrative guidelines and do not mandate a uniform pre deposit. The AO must consider prima facie case, likelihood of success, and undue hardship and may require a higher, lower or no deposit depending on case specific facts. Administrative adjustment of refunds without considering a pending stay application was held arbitrary and the matter was remitted for reconsideration applying these principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Technical services interpretation requires specialized expertise and a demonstrable link to payments for withholding tax consequences.
    Interpretation of technical services under the India Ireland DTAA requires the application or transfer of specialized knowledge, skill or expertise; incidental training or assistance enabling a reseller to market standard software does not meet that threshold. The Reseller Agreement did not contemplate technology transfer or bespoke solutions, payments were tied to reseller net revenue, and the record lacked material linking remittances to customized technical services. Authorities must establish an evidentiary and contractual nexus between payments and provision of specialized technical services before applying withholding tax under the treaty.

    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 193 "Tax on income from Global Depository Receipts purchased in foreign currency or capital gains arising from their transfer." 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 193 Tax on income from Global Depository Receipts purchased in foreign currency or capital gains arising from their transfer.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The materials are two texts: (i) Section 193 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (final statutory text) and (ii) Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version). Both address tax treatment of income from Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) acquired in foreign currency by resident employees of certain knowledge-based Indian companies or their subsidiaries. The documents matter to resident individual employees, employers in specified industries, tax administrators and advisers. Effective date or enactment/decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: provision numbered 193 in the Income-tax Act, 2025 (and correspondingly in the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version). Subject-matter: special tax treatment and specified rates for income from dividends on GDRs purchased in foreign currency under employee stock schemes and long-term capital gains on transfer of such GDRs where the taxpayer is a resident individual employee of an Indian company engaged in specified knowledge-based industries or services or of its subsidiary. The texts define multiple terms for the purposes of the section/clause. Any additional statutory cross-references appearing: section 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 and section 72(6) of the Income-tax Act (reference to non-application). Other cross-references or rules: Not stated in the document.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The provision applies to a resident individual who is an employee of an Indian company engaged in a "specified knowledge based industry or service" or an employee of its subsidiary (including foreign subsidiary). When such resident employee's total income includes certain GDR-related incomes, special tax treatment applies. The Table specifies three categories:

      • Dividend on GDRs of an Indian company issued under employee stock option schemes (as notified) and purchased in foreign currency - taxed at 10%.
      • Long-term capital gains (LTCG) from transfer of those GDRs - taxed at 12.5%.
      • Remaining total income (total income reduced by items 1 and 2) - taxed at "Rates in force" (i.e., regular applicable tax rates).

      Definitions relevant to scope are provided in subsection (4). Notable definitions: "Global Depository Receipts," "Overseas Depository Bank," and categories of "specified knowledge based industry or service" (information technology software; information technology service; entertainment service; pharmaceutical industry; bio-technology industry; and any other industry or service specified by Central Government notification). "Information technology software" and "information technology service" are defined with technical descriptions. The provision also treats subsidiary as per Companies Act, 2013 s.2(87), expressly including subsidiaries incorporated outside India.

      Interpretation

      The Act indicates a legislative intent to subject two specific types of GDR-related incomes received by resident employees in specified industries to specified, concessional or specialised tax rates (10% for dividends and 12.5% for LTCG), while preserving the regular taxation regime for the remainder of the taxpayer's income. The provision further isolates those GDR incomes for bespoke treatment by directing deductions and computation mechanics in subsection (2). The text suggests the approach of segregating certain income streams and taxing them at fixed rates rather than allowing them to be blended into progressive slab rates for the whole income.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Key carve-outs and computational rules appearing in the text:

      • Subsection (2)(a): If gross total income consists only of dividends in respect of the GDRs (Table Sl. No. 1), no deduction shall be allowed to the individual under any other provision of the Act.
      • Subsection (2)(b): If gross total income includes any of the GDR incomes, the GDR income shall be excluded from gross total income for the purpose of computing deductions - i.e., deductions are computed as if gross total income were reduced by such GDR income.
      • Subsection (3): Section 72(6) shall not apply for computation of LTCG arising from transfer of the GDRs referred to in the table (i.e., rollover/aggregation rule in s.72(6) is inapplicable to these transfers).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A resident employee receives only dividend income of INR X from GDRs purchased in foreign currency under a notified ESOS. Under the provision, tax on that income is 10% and no other deductions under the Act are permitted. (All numeric amounts illustrative; No numeric examples are provided in the statutory text.)
      • Example 2: A resident employee has salary and also realises LTCG of INR Y on transfer of qualifying GDRs. LTCG taxed at 12.5%; the LTCG amount is excluded from gross total income for purposes of computing deductions - deductions are applied against the reduced gross total income (i.e., gross total income minus the GDR incomes). The remaining income is taxed at rates in force.

      Note: The text does not provide worked numerical examples. Not stated in the document.

      Interplay

      The provision expressly disapplies section 72(6) for computation of LTCG on the specified GDR transfers. It also cross-refers to Companies Act, 2013s.2(87) for the definition of subsidiary. Any interaction with other sections, notifications or rules beyond those explicitly mentioned: Not stated in the document. The provision contemplates additional specification by the Central Government via notification for the ESOS eligible and for enumerating other industries/services (clause (f) in definitions).

      Differences between the Two Texts and Practical Impact

      Comparison identifies only limited textual divergences between the Section 193 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (Document 1) and the Clause 193 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) (Document 2). These differences and their practical impacts are summarised below.

      • Framing of subsection (1) tax computation: - Bill Old Version (Doc 2): states "the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of income-tax specified in the column C thereof." - Act (Doc 1): states "the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of income-tax computed at the rate specified in the column C applied on the corresponding income specified in column B."
        • Practical impact: The Act text expressly states that column C is a rate applied to the corresponding income (clarifies computational method). The Bill's wording could have been read as specifying absolute amounts; the Act removes ambiguity by explicitly making column C a rate. This clarification affects tax computation practice and removes potential interpretive disputes about method of calculation.
      • Table heading wording for item 3: - Bill: column C reads "Income-tax chargeable on such income." - Act: column C reads "Rates in force."
        • Practical impact: The Act's wording clarifies that for the residual taxable income (total income reduced by GDR income), existing tax rates (i.e., the rates otherwise in force) apply. The Bill language could be read as repeating a computation result rather than pointing to applicable rates. The Act aligns the table to conventional statutory drafting where special rates are set and remaining income taxed at prevailing rates.
      • Punctuation and enumeration of Table items in definitions: - Bill separates clauses in definition (4)(a)(i)-(iii) with slightly different punctuation and includes a trailing "and" before clause (f). - Act uses semicolons, and clause (f) follows without trailing "and."
        • Practical impact: These are drafting/presentation differences with no substantive change to meaning.
      • Scope language in opening of subsection (1): - Bill: lists "an individual, who is a resident and an employee of an Indian company engaged in specified knowledge based industry or service, or an employee of its subsidiary engaged in specified knowledge based industry or service." - Act: same content but formatted with parenthetical "(hereafter in this section referred to as the resident employee)."
        • Practical impact: substantively identical; Act formalises the short-form label "resident employee" for later cross-reference in the section.
      • Miscellaneous editorial differences: Minor differences such as insertion of "Income" in the Act table heading and more explicit phrasing in Act sub-section (1) (described above).
        • Practical impact: primarily clarity and removal of ambiguity in computation; no substantive extension or restriction of scope evident from the texts provided.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Employers and resident employees must identify whether GDRs were "issued as per such Employees' Stock Option Scheme as the Central Government may, by notification, specify" and whether the GDRs were purchased in foreign currency. Tax withholding and reporting must reflect the special rates (10% for dividends, 12.5% for LTCG). Failure to segregate these incomes for computation of deductions as mandated could result in under- or over-claiming of deductions and assessments.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The text implies the need to maintain documentation proving (a) GDRs were acquired under the relevant ESOS and purchased in foreign currency; (b) GDRs are of an Indian issuing company and listed on a recognised Indian stock exchange (where applicable) or meet other listing criteria in clause (4)(a); (c) employment status and industry classification of the employer/subsidiary. The statute does not prescribe specific forms or timelines. Not stated in the document.

      Key Takeaways

      • The Act prescribes special tax rates for GDR-related dividend income (10%) and long-term capital gains (12.5%) for resident employees of specified knowledge-based companies or their subsidiaries.
      • GDR incomes are segregated from gross total income for the purpose of deduction computation; where gross total income consists only of GDR dividends, no deductions are allowed.
      • Section 72(6) is explicitly not applicable to LTCG on the specified GDRs.
      • Definitions tightly frame "Global Depository Receipts" and "specified knowledge based industry or service," with a power for the Central Government to notify further industries/services and ESOS schemes.
      • Main differences between the Bill Old Version and the Act are drafting clarifications concerning the computation method (Act clarifies column C is a rate) and the wording for residual income taxation ("Rates in force"), which reduce ambiguity but do not change substantive scope.

      Full Text:

      Section 193 Tax on income from Global Depository Receipts purchased in foreign currency or capital gains arising from their transfer.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax