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
    TDS and International Transactions: Categorization of Payments under the ambit of "royalty" or "fees...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessment u/s 153C and Unexplained Investments: A Case Study in Legal Reasoning
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delhi High Court Elucidates on the Scope of Section 80IA in the Context of Business Expansion: Inter...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Penalty Limitations and Reasonable Cause: Navigating the Nuances of Tax Penalties
    Joint Insolvency Applications in Real Estate and Fulfillment of Threshold under IBC: Limitation and ...
    Digital Authentication in Tax Notices and the Interplay of Sections 61 and 74 in GST Law: Exploring ...
    Confirmation of GST demand by adjudicating Show Cause notice u/s 73: Procedural Requirements and Fai...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Customs Duty of an EOU and the Fate of Obsolete Imports: Destroying Obsolete Goods without Paying Du...
    Understanding the Bail Denial: Case Analysis of a Money Laundering Offense
    When Taxpayers Make Mistakes in Filing GST Returns: Understanding the Legal Aspect of GST Rectificat...
    Navigating Insolvency Proceedings: Understanding CoC's Role and Section 65 of IBC in Corporate Liqu...
    In-depth Legal Examination of a High-Profile Tax Evasion and Forgery Case: Bail Application Denied
    Unraveling the Inverted Duty Structure: Complexities of ITC Refunds in GST
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication of Show Cause Notice (SCN): The law requires authorities to exercis...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Labyrinth of Second-Hand Goods Import: The Intersection of Trade Policy and Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Income Tax Return Delays: High Court Rules on Tax Authority's Decision-Making Boundaries
    Navigating Tax Law Complexities: judicial approach towards the adjudication and appeal process
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Interplay of Sales and Bogus Purchases in Tax Evasion Cases: Assessing Tax Evasion Allegations
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Proportionality and Evidence in Tax Assessments: Accommodation entries, Bogus Purchase and Estimatio...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) Non-Deposit: Protecting the Rights of Taxpayers Ag...
❯❯
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
    Royalty vs fees for included services: classification of cross border lead generation payments determines TDS obligation under tax treaty.
    Categorisation of cross border payments as royalty or fees for included services under the India US DTAA determines withholding under Section 195. Royalties cover payments for use of intellectual property; fees for included services require that technical knowledge, skill, or know how be made available. Services limited to lead generation, databases, or market facilitation without transfer of proprietary technical content do not qualify as either category and therefore fall outside the DTAA based TDS obligation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Search-based assessment jurisdiction governs treatment of unexplained investments when records are absent, shifting the burden of proof to the assessee.
    Assessment based on search-derived incriminating material applies when jurisdiction under search-based assessment is not contested, and unexplained investments are taxed depending on whether amounts are recorded in books of account. The assessee bears the onus to explain investments; absence of records, non-filing of returns and non-cooperation justify adverse inferences. Procedural elements such as delay condonation, set-aside orders and cooperation in reassessment affect the assessment process, while interest for non-furnishing of returns is tied to the timing of the regular assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of Section 80IA: expansion within the same undertaking does not automatically forfeit tax holiday eligibility.
    The court considered whether adding services and acquiring additional licenses by a telecommunications company created a new "undertaking" for tax holiday purposes. Finding that the company continued its original business using largely the same infrastructure and manpower, the court endorsed the Tribunal's conclusion that expansion within the same operational framework does not automatically constitute a separate undertaking and should not defeat eligibility for the tax holiday intended to encourage capital intensive projects.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation for tax penalties: emphasis on initiation of action preserves enforcement; reasonable cause evaluated by business realities.
    Applicability of the limitation period is determined by the initiation of action rather than the formal start of penalty proceedings, making the triggering of enforcement activity the operative moment for limitation. The reasonable cause doctrine is applied with attention to the appellant's bank like operations despite its cooperative structure, recognizing long standing practices and business realities as bearing on culpability for transaction handling contraventions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Joint application maintainability under IBC: interconnected real estate defaults can meet allottee threshold despite limitation objections.
    Maintainability of a joint application under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is supported where separate corporate participants in a real estate project have interconnected obligations, allowing joinder in a single filing. The creditor threshold for initiating insolvency by allottees can include claims affected by limitation when the default is a continuous breach, producing a continuing cause of action under the Limitation Act and thereby supporting counting such claims toward the allottee threshold.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Digital authentication of tax notices enables enforcement despite verification procedures not being an absolute prerequisite for punitive action.
    The analysis focuses on the legal effect of digitally authenticated GST portal notices, the sufficiency of portal-based service for triggering taxpayer obligations, and the distinction between routine verification of returns and discretionary enforcement actions for suspected fraudulent defaults; it observes that verification is not an absolute prerequisite to initiate enforcement where officers reasonably suspect fraud, and that failure to engage with portal notices weakens natural justice claims.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice breach: non self contained, short notice show cause demands require reissuance with fair opportunity.
    A show cause notice initiating an adjudicatory demand must be self contained, supply sufficient material for response, and afford a reasonable opportunity to reply; an inadequate content and an unreasonably short response period (well below the preferred thirty days and below a minimum of fifteen days) violate audi alteram partem and procedural fairness. Defective notices warrant issuance of a fresh, legally valid notice rectifying the procedural defects, and may attract costs consequences against the issuing authority.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Destruction of obsolete imports: destruction with Customs permission can relieve full customs duty subject to procedural compliance.
    Whether imported raw materials and components rendered obsolete may be destroyed without paying customs duty where the unit obtains Customs permission and offers to pay duty on scrap value; reliance was placed on the Foreign Trade Policy, Circular No. 60/1999 Cus and an amendment to the governing Notification which exempts duty when goods are destroyed with Customs' permission, balanced against the Revenue's contention that non use within prescribed time attracts duty.
    Case LawsPMLA
    Show AI Summary
    Money laundering offence: bail refused where admissible witness statements and accused failed to discharge burden showing non involvement.
    Bail was refused where admissible witness statements provided a prima facie basis to implicate the appellant in money laundering and the accused failed to show non involvement or low risk of reoffending. Money laundering was treated as an independent offence tied to dealings in proceeds, admissible statements supported inferences from financial transactions and concealment, parity was held non automatic, and discretionary release for trial delay does not guarantee bail in serious economic offences.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    GST rectification: inadvertent filing errors may be amended when no revenue loss, encouraging taxpayer-friendly compliance.
    Rectification of GST return entries is permissible where errors are inadvertent and do not cause revenue loss. The court interprets CGST/MGST filing and correction provisions purposively, recognising practical difficulties faced by taxpayers and the central importance of accurate returns for downstream GST processes. Authorities are urged to permit amendments by online or manual means in cases of genuine mistake without fiscal prejudice, promoting a taxpayer friendly and pragmatic approach consistent with other high court decisions.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    CoC autonomy in insolvency: CoC may decide liquidation prior to plan confirmation and section 65 targets malicious filings.
    Committee of Creditors autonomy over liquidation is recognized: the CoC may lawfully decide liquidation under Section 33(2) before confirmation of a resolution plan, and Section 65 requires clear evidence of filings made for purposes other than insolvency resolution before imposing penal consequences.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Bail considerations: Serious economic offence allegations constrain pretrial liberty when evidence tampering and investigative integrity risks exist.
    Bail considerations focus on the seriousness of alleged tax evasion, forgery and conspiracy under the IPC, the risk of evidence tampering or witness influence, and the accused's antecedents; ongoing investigation complexity and public interest in protecting the exchequer weigh against interim release. Arguments relying on GST compounding or procedural non-compliance are distinguished from IPC offences, and precedents concerning customs or GST matters are treated as contextually different when assessing pretrial liberty.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit refund: prior IGST refunds do not bar unutilized ITC claims; supporting evidence required for reconsideration.
    The court analysed entitlement to refund of unutilized Input Tax Credit under an inverted duty structure and held that prior IGST refunds for zero-rated supplies do not automatically bar a Section 54 refund claim; absence of debit entries alone cannot justify rejection. The decision emphasises the requirement to submit comprehensive supporting documents distinguishing inputs affected by the inverted duty structure and directs reconsideration allowing additional evidence and a reasoned order consistent with statutory conditions and principles of natural justice.
    Case LawsCentral Excise
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable Time for Adjudication: undue delay undermines natural justice and precludes indefinite postponement of proceedings.
    Adjudication of an excise Show Cause Notice must occur within a reasonable time so as to preserve evidentiary integrity and witness availability; prolonged inaction between issuance of an SCN and hearing prejudices the respondent, infringes the principles of natural justice, and requires statutory time-limit language to be interpreted to prevent indefinite delay.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Second-hand goods import classification clarified: multifunction capital equipment falls under unrestricted category, subject to compliance and duty measures.
    The court determined that imported second-hand multifunction print and copying machines fall within the Foreign Trade Policy 2023 unrestricted category I(d) for second-hand capital goods and were incorrectly classified as prohibited by customs; it contrasted the 2023 and 2019 policies, relied on precedent, and directed the customs department to pass appropriate orders within a reasonable time while permitting provisional measures subject to enhanced duty payment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: focus on admissibility of the request, not the substantive merits of the tax claim.
    The legal principle requires that the authorized officer considering a condonation application under Section 119(2)(b) confine inquiry to the admissibility of the request and the justification for delay; assessment of the substantive merits of the taxpayer's income or loss claim is not part of the condonation exercise, and evidentiary review is limited to matters relevant to excusing the delay.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under CGST law prompts appeal remedy and partial refund direction, preserving pre-deposit and taxpayer rights.
    The adjudicating officer withdrew the demand for inadmissible input tax credit and related interest and penalty, while separately imposing a penalty under Section 122(1)(vii) of the CGST Act adjusted against amounts paid by the petitioner. The court recognized the petitioner's appellate remedy and directed a partial refund subject to retention as pre-deposit, reflecting the procedural interplay between administrative adjudication and judicial review and safeguarding taxpayer rights during appeal.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Interplay of sales and bogus purchases: sales consistency limits rejection of purchases and favors gross profit alignment for taxation.
    For traders, rejection of purchases cannot proceed in isolation where declared sales exhibit regularity; cost of goods sold must be coherent with recorded sales. Tax adjustments should compare differential gross profit margins and align challenged purchases with genuine GP rates, allowing proportional taxation reconciliations rather than adding the entire value of disputed purchases as income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Proportionality in tax assessments preserved: additions limited to profit element where sales are accepted, not entire purchase.
    Alleged accommodation entries may be restricted to taxation of the profit element where sales from those purchases are accepted; the tribunal limited an addition accordingly and the court upheld that proportionality. Separately, an enhanced gross profit addition was deleted because there was no concrete evidence to displace the assessee's declared book results; the court agreed that revenue must meet the evidentiary burden before altering declared figures.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax Deducted at Source protection: taxpayers not liable for employer's failure to deposit TDS; refunds should not be adjusted.
    The note explains that TDS credit protection bars holding an assessee liable for tax already deducted by an employer who failed to remit it; employers bear the deposit obligation as tax-collecting agents. Adjusting taxpayer refunds or using coercive measures to recover demands arising from employer non-deposit contravenes the protective principle and indirect recovery limits, and authorities should correct credit mismatches rather than treat deductees as liable.

    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