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
    The Legal Contours of Input Tax Credit Eligibility: Procedural Aspects of GST and ITC
    Case LawsService Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour and Corporate Responsibility: Analyzing the Supreme Court's Latest Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Procedural Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice in Tax Administration: A High Court Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revision u/s 263 and denial of deduction u/s 80IA: A Critical Analysis of the Delhi High Court's Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Condonation of Delay and Jurisdictional Challenges: A Case Analysis of ITAT Kolkata's Decision
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis: Scrutiny of Share Capital and Premium Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Retrospective Cancellation of Charitable Trust Registration: A Case Analysis of...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Office and Prosecution under Income Tax Act: Jurisdiction of Trial Court - Decision in a High Profil...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxation of Unexplained Income at Higher Rate of tax u/s 115BBE : A Comprehensive Analysis of the IT...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Analysis of ITAT Mumbai Judgment - Transfer Pricing Adjustment Dispute: Period of limitation u/s 144...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    In-Depth Analysis of Key Issues in the ITAT Chennai Judgement
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Doctrine of Merger in Income Tax Assessment: An Analysis of ITAT Chennai's Recent Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delay in refund processing, the petitioner's entitlement to interest, and the court's decision to gr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Rejection of revision application u/s 264 in favor of assessee: A beneficial provision of Income Tax...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    An Analysis of ITAT Decision on International Taxation, Capital Gains, and DTAA
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxability of CSR fund: Treatment of certain funds received by an entity, particularly focusing on w...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis of ESOP Deduction and allowability in the Revised Return of income: An ITAT decision.
❯❯
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 LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility: procedural limits on reversing claims without supplier inquiry and GSTR-2A non-reflection not dispositive.
    Section 16(2) sets the statutory conditions for Input Tax Credit-tax invoice, receipt, tax payment, and return filing-and GSTR-2A serves only as a facilitator; non-reflection there does not automatically negate eligibility. Tax authorities must inquire into supplier conduct and observe procedural safeguards before reversing ITC or recovering tax from the recipient, with judicial precedents and CBIC clarifications shaping when exceptions may apply.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reverse charge mechanism: exporter not liable for foreign bank charges when Indian bank is the direct service recipient.
    The core issue is whether an exporter is liable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for foreign bank charges deducted from export proceeds when those charges are imposed on and paid by an Indian intermediary bank. The Tribunal's analysis focuses on the definition of service recipient and territorial scope, concluding that the direct recipient-the Indian bank-is the party liable to discharge service tax while the exporter, as an indirect beneficiary without direct dealings with the foreign bank, is not subject to reverse charge.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Directorial liability: strict averment requirement prevents presuming directors' responsibility without specific allegation, leading to quashing.
    The Court held that directorial liability requires specific averment that the director was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at the time of the offence; mere titular position or awareness of cheque issuance is insufficient. It emphasized the necessity of serving the statutory notice prerequisite and rejected liberal construction to cure absent statutory averments, quashing proceedings against directors for non-compliance.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    DIN requirement in tax administration: absence of mandatory DIN can invalidate assessment orders unless exceptional circumstances apply.
    Failure to quote the mandatory computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) in assessment orders, as required by the CBDT Circular from 1 October 2019, constitutes a procedural defect that can render the order invalid unless the revenue demonstrates that the issuance fell within the Circular's narrowly drawn exceptional circumstances; the Tribunal found such non-compliance in the order dated 15 October 2019 and the High Court affirmed, while the Supreme Court granted interim stay for further consideration.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Capitation fee allegations challenge admissibility and attribution of seized evidence in charitable trust tax exemption inquiries.
    Alleged collection of capitation fees by a registered charitable trust threatens its exemption under Section 11; most evidence was seized from employees' residences, invoking the presumption under Section 132(4A) and raising attribution issues. Employee admissions later retracted, similar statement drafting, declarations under the Income Declaration Scheme 2016, and trustees' acknowledgments create contradictory evidentiary threads that complicate admissibility, credibility, and whether the seized funds can be treated as trust income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax compliance: liberal interpretation protects bona fide taxpayers from technical disqualification.
    The court analysed whether delay in filing Form 10 could be condoned, considering the petitioner's unawareness of post 2016 amendments, CBDT circulars and precedent, and applying principles that each case be judged on its facts; it stressed that failure to claim accumulation does not by itself show absence of intent to comply and urged a liberal approach to mitigate genuine hardship and prevent procedural technicalities from defeating substantive justice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 263 limited to substantial legal errors; mere differences of opinion don't justify revisional tax action.
    Scope of Section 263 is confined to instances where an assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue in a substantial way, not mere differences of opinion. Migration of licences from IP VPN to NLD ILD does not, by itself, create a new undertaking defeating entitlement to deduction under Section 80IA(4)(ii), particularly where identical deductions were previously allowed; administrative migration requires clear proof of substantive change before re characterising eligibility.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Delay condonation based on sufficient cause upheld where illness, relocation and pandemic disruption justified late filing and jurisdictional challenge.
    The tribunal applied a purposive construction of sufficient cause to condone substantial delay where cumulative factors-serious illness, change of residence and pandemic disruption-made filing untimely. It also found the assessment infirm for want of territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction because the taxpayer had established residence and filing history in a different territorial unit and administrative guidance allocated jurisdiction accordingly, underscoring that proper vesting of authority is a condition precedent to valid assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Unexplained cash credits under Section 68 require taxpayers to prove investor identity and genuineness; authorities must rebut with evidence.
    Applicability of Section 68 requires the assessee to establish investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness-via PAN, tax returns, audited accounts and bank statements-and once this initial burden is satisfied, the burden shifts to the revenue to rebut with concrete evidence; mere suspicion or inability to trace an ultimate source does not alone justify additions if investments are reasonable relative to investors' net worth and effected through banking channels.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective cancellation of charitable trust registration invalidated due to lack of competent jurisdiction and procedural non compliance.
    The Tribunal invalidated the cancellation of a charitable trust's registration because the regional authority lacked competence to cancel under the statutory scheme and the transfer used to reassign the matter was improper; it further held that applying the newer cancellation provision retrospectively to deprive the trust of its recognized status was not legally tenable, emphasizing required notice, hearing and adherence to principled statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction in multi locational offences governs venue determination; magistrate discretion and supervisory thresholds shape tax prosecution forums under criminal procedure.
    The judgment analyses Cr.P.C. place of offence principles in multi locational tax prosecutions, assessing whether procedural acts like recording statements under the Income Tax Act determine venue. It evaluates the magistrate's discretion in taking cognizance where alleged offences span jurisdictions and outlines the threshold for superior court supervisory intervention, emphasising that extraordinary petitions require demonstration of abuse of process or exceptional circumstances before altering magistrate venue determinations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxation of unexplained income: higher-rate treatment applies, and deductions including partner salary are disallowed.
    The tribunal held that excess unrecorded stock and cash found on survey were assessable as unexplained investment and unexplained money, and that the special higher-rate taxation provision applies to such income, taxing it at a higher fixed rate and disallowing any deduction; consequently the claimed partner's salary relating to the unexplained investment was disallowed.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation under section 144C: assessment issued beyond statutory period, leaving transfer pricing adjustment unresolved on procedural grounds.
    The tribunal focused on the statutory time limit under Section 144C(13) for passing assessment orders after DRP directions, treated the order as barred by limitation and therefore did not adjudicate substantive transfer pricing challenges raised under Section 92CA. Consequently, technical disputes over comparability, exclusion/inclusion of comparables, and the profit level indicator computation were left unexamined.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Capitalization of interest: tribunal scrutinised whether interest and forex on capital projects form capital cost or permit revenue deduction.
    The tribunal analyzed four core taxation questions: whether interest and foreign exchange fluctuations written off from Capital Work in Progress are capital or revenue in nature and their nexus to business operations; whether write off of a DG set component should be treated within the block of assets for depreciation or as a revenue repair; the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) to proportionate interest on interest free advances to related concerns and the presumption from mixed funds; and the evidentiary requirements to establish that inter corporate deposits were funded from own funds rather than borrowed monies for interest deduction purposes.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of merger limits revisional jurisdiction under appeals, preventing collateral review of identical legal issues.
    The Doctrine of Merger operates to treat legal issues from an assessment as merged into appeal proceedings before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), thereby constraining subsequent revisional jurisdiction over those same issues; applied where initial assessment, reassessment notices and search-related assessment steps overlap, and supported by judicial precedent limiting collateral revision.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Interest on delayed tax refunds where delay is not attributable to the taxpayer under Section 244A.
    Entitlement to interest under Section 244A arises when refund payment is delayed for reasons not attributable to the assessee. The petitioner, a foreign company, faced delays caused by technical issues and incorrect guidance regarding banking details; the court treated the delay as the respondents' responsibility and applied Section 244A to award interest for the period of delay, directing payment according to the statutory rate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision application under Section 264: remand for fresh merits review when alternative remedies were improperly relied upon.
    Whether a revision under Section 264 may be denied solely because alternative remedies existed and whether appeal provisions applied to DDT-related treaty claims; the court found that rejecting revision on the mere availability of other remedies was untenable and that the appealed provision was inapplicable, directing fresh merits consideration of treaty relief and related tax computation by the Principal Commissioner.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    DTAA interpretation clarifies capital gains tax treatment for cross-border share sales under residency and grandfathering conditions.
    Taxation of capital gains from a Mauritius-based entity's sale of Indian company shares is analysed against the India-Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, focusing on DTAA allocation of taxing rights, timing of acquisition and transfer, and applicability of grandfathering provisions. The Tribunal assessed tax residency and treaty entitlement by examining corporate structure and commercial substance, applying the substance over form principle to determine whether treaty benefits were appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Fiduciary funds not treated as taxable income when entity acts as facilitator; earmarked project funds excluded from income.
    The Tribunal examined whether earmarked receipts should be included in taxable income or treated on the balance sheet, focusing on jurisdictional validity of scrutiny notices, whether amounts were routed through the income and expenditure account or retained as earmarked funds, and whether receipts held in a fiduciary capacity for disaster relief were excluded from the entity's income because the entity acted only as facilitator without beneficial ownership.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    ESOP deduction in revised returns - tribunal permits claim within revision window, stressing valuation, timing and documentary consistency.
    Deductibility of ESOP-related costs in a revised return hinges on compliance with the statutory time limit for revision and on accounting and evidentiary consistency: correct year of recognition, reliable grant date valuation (e.g., Black Scholes), concordant employee records, and disclosure in audited accounts. The tribunal found the claim allowable within the revision window but emphasised documentary proof, valuation method and timing of liability as central to acceptability.

    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