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 267 "Tax on updated return." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      9 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 267 Tax on updated return.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 267 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) concerning payment requirements and additional income-tax on an updated return under proposed section 263(6). It matters because it prescribes mandatory payment, additional tax percentages and interest computation rules where a taxpayer files an updated return late or after an earlier return; affected parties include taxpayers required to file updated returns and the tax department administering collection. Effective or operative dates are not stated in the document beyond a temporal limit for guideline issuance (two years from 1 April, 2026).

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 267 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025, dealing with "Tax on updated return" and interaction with proposed section 263 (filing of returns and processing). Coverage: situations where a taxpayer has not previously furnished a return u/s 263(1) or (4) or where an earlier return u/s 263(1), (4) or (5) has been furnished but a later updated return under 263(6) results in tax being payable. The text establishes payment obligations, the set-off of certain amounts, computation of an "additional income-tax" as a percentage of tax and interest, and rules for computation of interest. Definitions: the provision defines "assessed tax" contextually and cross-references numerous provisions-sections 157, 159, 160, 166, 206 (various subclauses), 423, 424, 425 and 266. No separate definitional section is provided within Clause 267 itself (e.g., "assessed tax" is defined only within the clause).

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 267 applies in two distinct factual matrices: (i) where no earlier return u/s 263(1) or (4) has been furnished and an updated return u/s 263(6) would give rise to tax payable (sub-section (1)); and (ii) where an earlier return u/s 263(1), (4) or (5) has been furnished but, after taking specified omitted amounts into account (as increased by any refund issued on the earlier return), tax becomes payable when an updated return under 263(6) is furnished (sub-section (3)). In both cases the assessee is liable to pay the tax along with interest and fee for delay/default, and must pay an "additional income-tax" as computed under sub-section (5) before furnishing the updated return; proof of payment must accompany the return.

      Interpretation

      Clause 267 demonstrates a legislative intent to deter late or corrective filings that reduce the state's revenue by imposing graduated additional tax multipliers (25%, 50%, 60%, 70% depending on delay band) on the aggregate of tax and interest. The provision emphasizes immediate payment before filing and documentation of such payment, indicating an intent to secure revenue before allowing assessment processes to proceed. The cross-references to reliefs and credits show an intent to net off amounts already allowed or claimed so that additional tax is computed on the net tax liability arising on the updated return.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      The clause contains several carve-outs and conditions: certain credits or relief already claimed in an earlier return are to be taken into account (sub-section (4) lists such items) and tax already paid as advance tax, TDS/TCS, and foreign tax reliefs are to be deducted (sub-section (2)). Interest paid in an earlier return reduces the additional income-tax computation (sub-section (3)(b)). There is an administrative proviso conferring power on the Board, with Central Government approval, to issue guidelines to remove difficulty (sub-section (8)), subject to constraints including a two-year outer limit for issuing guidelines (sub-section (9)) and parliamentary laying and modification mechanism (sub-section (10)).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: Taxpayer A filed no return for FY 2024-25. On realisation of income omitted, updated return u/s 263(6) shows tax and interest of INR 100,000. If filed within 12 months from end of next FY, additional income-tax equals 25% of INR 100,000 = INR 25,000, payable with the tax and interest before filing. (Numbers illustrative; computation corresponds to sub-section (5)(a).)
      • Example 2: Taxpayer B had earlier return but omitted certain foreign income for which foreign tax credit is claimed u/s 159(1). The omitted income increases tax due. The taxpayer must pay tax, interest, and additional income-tax (reduced by interest already paid in earlier return). (Consistent with sub-sections (3)-(5) and (4)(c).)

      Interplay

      Clause 267 expressly interacts with multiple provisions: sections 157, 159(1)/(2), 160 (foreign tax relief and deductions); section 266 (relief/tax credit); Chapter XIX-B (TDS/TCS); section 206 (tax credits as per section 206(13) in the Bill); and sections 423-425 (interest computations). The clause prescribes that, for certain interest computations, the amount on which interest is computed is the "assessed tax" defined within the clause as the tax on total income declared in the updated return after taking into account specified credits and as increased by any refund on the earlier return. The Board's guideline power (with a two-year issuance window) will affect administration of these interactions.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Reference to tax credit provisions (206(1)(m)-(p), 206(2)(e)-(h) versus section 206(13)) - Document 1 (Section 267) refers specifically to tax-credit provisions in sections 206(1)(m) to (p) and 206(2)(e) to (h) in sub-sections (2)(f), (4)(e) and (7)(a)(v). Document 2 (Clause 267, Bill) instead refers broadly to "section 206(13)" in the parallel places.
        • Practical impact: the Bill's cross-reference condenses multiple specific subclauses into a single aggregated provision number. This may broaden or narrow the set of credits covered depending on the content of section 206(13) (not stated here). The change affects which tax credits are taken into account when computing amounts to be reduced from additional tax; it therefore has direct compliance and computation implications for taxpayers claiming credits.
      • Treatment and numbering of guideline/notification power - Document 1 contains sub-section (8) empowering the Board, with previous Central Government approval, to issue guidelines to remove difficulty; sub-section (9) requires laying such guidelines before Parliament and contemplates modification/annulment by both Houses. Document 2 relocates and modifies these provisions: its sub-section (8) authorises the Board to issue guidelines "removing the difficulty" (slightly different wording), sub-section (9) imposes an outer temporal limit-"No guidelines under sub-section (8) shall be issued after the expiration of two years from the 1st April, 2026." Document 2 retains parliamentary laying and modification language in sub-section (10).
        • Practical impact: the Bill introduces a sunset for guideline-making (two-year window from 1 April 2026), limiting administrative flexibility after that period. Tax administration will have a time-bound window to issue clarificatory guidelines; post-expiry, any necessary broader administrative clarifications would likely require amendment or other measures.
      • Minor drafting and terminological differences - Document 1 uses expressions such as "amounts referred to in sub-section (2)" and "the amounts referred to in sub-section (3)" while Document 2 alternates with "The sums referred to in sub-section (3)" and retains "amounts" elsewhere.
        • Practical impact: largely drafting in style only; no substantive legal change apparent from these wording differences alone.
      • Order and numbering of subsections toward the end - Document 1 contains provisions numbered through (11), with distinct mechanics in sub-section (10) and (11). Document 2 extends numbering to (12) (with comparable content but slightly different clause-lettering at the end).
        • Practical impact: numbering differences could affect citation precision; substance of interest-computation provisions is substantially similar, though the Bill includes the sunset for guideline issuance (not present in Document 1).

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers filing updated returns must ensure that payment of tax, fee, interest and the prescribed additional income-tax is made before filing; failure will breach statutory preconditions for acceptance and expose taxpayers to additional liabilities. The progressive slabs (25% to 70%) create material marginal cost for delayed updates, increasing compliance risk for late filers. Where credits u/s 206(13) are implicated, taxpayers need to reconcile entitlement carefully before filing.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: Taxpayers must retain proof of payment of tax, interest, fee and additional income-tax to accompany the updated return (statutory requirement). Documentation supporting claims of advance tax, TDS/TCS, foreign tax paid and creditable amounts must be maintained to substantiate sums taken into account under sub-sections (2) and (4). Any interest previously paid (on earlier return) must be documented to support reduction of additional income-tax as provided in sub-section (3)(b).

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 267 mandates payment of tax, interest, fee and an additional income-tax at the time of filing an updated return u/s 263(6).
      • Various credits and prior payments (advance tax, TDS/TCS, foreign tax reliefs, and tax credits u/s 206(13)) reduce the amount payable; precise applicability depends on whether such items were claimed or omitted in earlier returns.
      • Additional income-tax is graduated by delay bands: 25% (within 12 months), 50% (12-24 months), 60% (24-36 months), 70% (36-48 months) of aggregate tax and interest.
      • Interest computation rules tie to sections 423-425 and the clause defines "assessed tax" for interest purposes; interest paid earlier reduces additional income-tax in specified cases.
      • The Board is empowered to issue guidelines to remove difficulties, but the Bill confines guideline issuance to a two-year window from 1 April 2026; all guidelines must be laid before Parliament and are subject to modification/annulment.
      • Taxpayers must accompany updated returns with proof of payment; failure to do so may affect acceptance and expose taxpayers to further compliance cost.
      • Certain details-implementation mechanisms, forms, procedural timelines beyond those stated, and the content of section 206(13)-are not stated in the document.

      Full Text:

      Section 267 Tax on updated return.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax