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 205 "Conditions for tax on income of certain companies and co-operative societies." 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 205 Conditions for tax on income of certain companies and co-operative societies.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 205 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) sets conditions for concessional tax treatment under specified clauses (sections 199, 200, 201, 203 and 204) by prescribing that total income be computed without specified deductions/exemptions, and by laying down eligibility conditions and administrative safeguards. It matters to companies and co-operative societies seeking concessional tax rates under the cited provisions, and to revenue authorities supervising compliance. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      The provision sits within the Bill's "New tax regime" and is a statutory hook for concessions referenced in sections 199(1)(c)(i)(C), 200(1)(a)(iii), 201(3)(a)(iii), 203(1)(a)(ii) and 204(3)(a)(ii). Clause 205 prescribes how "total income" is to be computed for these purposes by excluding certain deductions or exemptions (narrowly identifying sections from the principal Act such as sections 33(8), 45(3), 46, 47(1)(a), 48, 49 and 144). It also sets eligibility conditions for assessees claiming rates u/s 201 (and allied provisions), empowers the Board (with Central Government approval) to issue guidelines to address difficulties in meeting conditions, includes parliamentary laying requirements for such guidelines, and gives the Assessing Officer (AO) a power to recharacterise profits where inter-party arrangements produce more than ordinary profits. Definitions and specific exclusions to the meaning of "manufacture or production" are provided.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 205 operates in three principal veins: (1) mechanical computation rule for "total income" when concessional clauses apply; (2) eligibility conditions for availing the concessional computation; and (3) administrative/assessorial powers to adjust profits and to issue guidelines. The listed provisions that must not be allowed as deductions or exemptions for computing total income are: section 33(8) (as prescribed), section 45(3)(a)/(b)/(c), section 46, section 47(1)(a), section 48, section 49 and section 144. The clause then sets four conditions (sub-section (2)(a)-(d)) concerning origin of the business (no split-up/reconstruction except subject to section 140(4) carve-out), restriction on used plant/machinery (with a 20% value cap and permitted foreign-used machinery exception), prohibition on using buildings previously used as hotels/convention centres (in respect of which section 80-ID deduction was claimed), and limitation of business activity to manufacture/production (plus related research/distribution). The AO is authorised, for purposes of section 201, to determine deemed profits where related-party or other arrangements yield more than ordinary profits, and where such arrangements involve a specified domestic transaction (section 164), the arm's length principle (section 173(a)) applies.

      Interpretation

      The text manifests a legislative intent to restrict the scope of preferential taxation by (a) mandating computation of total income without several specific deductions or exemptions, and (b) placing qualitative/quantitative conditions on the nature and origin of the business and on the use of assets. The inclusion of an AO power to determine "profits as may be reasonably deemed" and to apply arm's length principles for specified domestic transactions indicates an intent to deter related-party arrangements engineered to obtain concessional rates. The Board-with-Central-Government guideline mechanism is intended to provide administrative flexibility to resolve difficulties in meeting the enumerated conditions.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      The Bill contains explicit carve-outs: businesses formed by re-establishment/reconstruction/revival pursuant to section 140(4) are permitted; foreign-used machinery imported into India that was not previously used in India and in respect of which no depreciation had been allowed is exempted as "permitted machinery or plant used outside India"; and the 20% cap permits limited use of previously used machinery/plant. The definition of "manufacture or production" explicitly excludes certain activities (e.g., development of computer software, mining, conversion of marble blocks into slabs, bottling of gas into cylinders, printing of books or production of cinematograph films) and allows the Central Government to notify other exclusions.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A domestic company set up by splitting an existing undertaking would be ineligible to claim the concessional computation unless it qualifies as a re-establishment within section 140(4). (Derived from sub-section (2)(a).)
      • Example 2: An assessee imports second-hand machinery that was used outside India and had never been used in India; no depreciation was previously claimed for that machinery anywhere - it falls within "permitted machinery or plant used outside India." (Derived from sub-section (6)(b)(ii) as numbered in the Bill.)
      • Example 3: A group arranges intra-group transactions yielding above-ordinary profits; the AO may determine deemed excess profits and treat that excess as income chargeable u/s 201 at the specified concessional rate, applying arm's length pricing if the transaction is a specified domestic transaction. (Derived from sub-section (5).)

      Interplay

      The clause cross-references multiple provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961: sections 33(8), 45(3), 46, 47(1)(a), 48, 49, 80-ID(6) meanings for "hotel" and "convention centre," section 140(4) for revival/reconstruction carve-out, section 164 for specified domestic transactions, section 173(a) for arm's length price, and section 116(13)(e) for "unabsorbed depreciation." It also references the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 for the meaning of "Unit." The Board's guideline power requires previous approval of the Central Government and is subject to parliamentary laying (procedural oversight). No rules or notifications beyond these cross-references are reproduced in the Bill text.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Sunset clause for issuance of guidelines: The Bill (Document 2) contained an express time-limit: "No guideline under sub-section (2) shall be issued after the expiration of two years from the 1st April, 2026." The Act (Document 1) omits this proviso and instead provides procedural parliamentary laying (now placed as sub-section (3) in the Act).
        • Practical impact: removal of the two-year sunset in the Act gives the Board-with-Central-Government approval continuing discretion to issue guidelines beyond 1 April 2028; administrative flexibility is increased and industry may face an indefinite period of potential guideline issuance.
      • Locus and scope of assessing officer power: In the Bill the provision conferring power on the Assessing Officer to determine deemed excess profits is located in sub-section (5) and explicitly applies "for the purposes of section 201." The Act places a substantively similar provision in sub-section (4) and expressly states it applies "for the purposes of sections 201 and 204."
        • Practical impact: in the Act the assessing officer's power to compute deemed profits is extended to both sections 201 and 204, broadening the circumstances where the AO may attribute excess profits and charge them at the specified concessional rates; taxpayers facing assessments u/s 204 may therefore be subject to these transfer-pricing style adjustments.
      • Reordering and numbering: Substantive topics (guidelines, parliamentary laying, AO powers, definitions) are presented in different sub-section order between the Bill and the Act.
        • Practical impact: reordering does not change substance (aside from the differences above) but may affect ease of reference.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Claimants of concessional taxation must ensure the business is not a prohibited re-creation of an existing business (absent section 140(4) coverage), must monitor the provenance and aggregate value of previously used machinery (20% ceiling), must avoid using buildings previously qualifying u/s 80-ID for hotel/convention centre deductions, and must ensure their activity falls within the statutory definition of manufacture/production (subject to enumerated exclusions). Related-party arrangements should be structured mindful of the AO's power to recharacterise profits and apply arm's length pricing for specified domestic transactions.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: taxpayers should retain documentary evidence proving origin of business (formation/reconstruction records), invoices and import documentation for foreign-used machinery (showing non-use in India and date of import), valuation records demonstrating the 20% threshold calculation, and contemporaneous transfer-pricing/arm's-length documentation for intra-group transactions to counter AO adjustments. Evidence of prior claims of section 80-ID deductions for buildings will be relevant.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 205 prescribes that, for certain concessional tax clauses, total income must be computed ignoring specific deductions/exemptions listed in the text.
      • Eligibility is conditioned on non-splitting/reconstruction (with a narrow section 140(4) exception), limits on previously used machinery (20% value cap), prohibition on certain previously used buildings, and restriction to manufacturing/production (with enumerated exclusions).
      • The Board may issue guidelines (with Central Government approval) to resolve difficulties in meeting these conditions; such guidelines must be laid before Parliament.
      • The Assessing Officer is empowered to determine and charge as income profits deemed to be in excess of ordinary profits where related arrangements inflate profits; arm's length principles apply to specified domestic transactions.
      • Extensive cross-references to existing Income-tax Act provisions and the SEZ Act indicate interaction with transfer-pricing, depreciation, and past incentives (section 80-ID).

      Full Text:

      Section 205 Conditions for tax on income of certain companies and co-operative societies.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax