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 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