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
    Reassessing Accommodation Entries: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Judicial Perspective on Section 148A of the Income Tax Act: Amended Reassessment Provisions
    Case LawsCustoms
    Analyzing Legal Principles in a Gold Smuggling Case: The Role of Co-accused Statements and Procedura...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Threshold set for monetary limits in filing appeals by Revenue: A policy shift towards reducing liti...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Consequences of Goods Misdeclaration in Customs Law
    Upholding Procedural Justice in GST Administration: Adjudication of GST demand u/s 74
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    High Court's Stance on Penalty Notices in Tax Law: A Balance Between Procedure and Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Penalty Provisions under Section 271(1)(c): Analyzing the Fine Line Between Concealment...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act: Between Legal Intent and Factual Circ...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    An Analysis of the Natural Justice Principle in Tender Cancellation: A Case Study
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Principles of Natural Justice and Administrative Action: Balancing Municipal Powers and Citizen Righ...
    Navigating Disclosure and Fair Trial in FEMA Proceedings: A Supreme Court Analysis
    Case LawsCustoms
    Legal Issues in Customs Duty Evasion: Penalties
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessing Penalties for non-filing of ITR: A Deep Dive into Section 271F of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Addition after survey option as Unaccounted income: Burden to prove and evidence.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decision on Depreciation and Expenditure
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Through Reimbursement Expenses, DDT Refunds, and Transfer Pricing Adjustments
    A Judicial Perspective on Locus Standi in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Cases
    Navigating Shareholder Rights in Corporate Insolvency: An Analysis of NCLAT’s Decision on the issu...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Financial Distress: A Legal Analysis of Progressive Tax Instalment Judgments
❯❯
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
    Reassessment under Section 148A: disputed factual issues on accommodation entries directed to the assessing officer for factual determination.
    The High Court required detailed scrutiny of alleged accommodation entries and the genuineness of share transactions under the reassessment procedure, noting taxpayers' disclosure of income as Short Term Capital Gains. Applying precedents on judicial review, the court held that disputed factual questions and the procedural validity of reassessment are to be determined by the Assessing Officer rather than in writ proceedings, absent evidence of arbitrariness or limitation breach.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 148A preliminary enquiry limits inquiry to existence of information before reassessment and preserves assessee procedural rights.
    Preliminary enquiries under the post amendment reassessment procedure require the assessing officer to possess tangible information suggesting escaped income and to afford the assessee an opportunity to respond before issuing a reassessment notice; the officer's inquiry at this stage is limited to ascertaining existence of such information and does not adjudicate the merits, while procedural protections-objection, access to information, and appellate remedies-remain available.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Co accused statements: cannot alone ground smuggling conviction; requires corroboration and procedural compliance to protect presumption of innocence.
    A solitary declaration by a co accused is insufficient to establish participation in a smuggling offence without independent corroborative evidence linking the accused to the seized goods or operation; reliance on such statements without examination and opportunity for cross examination undermines their evidentiary value and contravenes fair trial protections and the presumption of innocence.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary limits for appeals reshape Revenue litigation strategy, reducing low stake appeals and encouraging selective prosecution.
    The court treated CBDT instructions on monetary limits as possessing binding effect within the statutory appeals framework, harmonising the right to appeal with monetary limit provisions and applying policy considerations from the National Litigation Policy to limit low stake Revenue appeals; this approach affects Revenue litigation strategy, judicial resource allocation, taxpayer relief, and invites possible legislative clarification regarding retrospective or prospective application.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Misdeclaration of goods: deliberate misstatements attract differential duty, redemption fines and potential confiscation under customs law.
    Misdeclaration of goods in declared quantity and weight violates the statutory declaration regime; an accurate declaration is essential to duty assessment, and material, deliberate discrepancies justify imposition of differential duty, redemption fines and potential confiscation to protect revenue and deter evasion.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness in GST notices: ensure intimation precedes show cause notice and allow reasonable opportunity to reply.
    The case addresses non-compliance with GST notice procedures where intimation in Form GST DRC-01A and a show cause notice under Section 74(1) were issued simultaneously, depriving the taxpayer of a statutory opportunity to reply. Emphasising procedural fairness and the right to a fair hearing, the court required that the taxpayer be allowed to file a response within a specified timeframe and that further proceedings, including any fresh notice, follow after consideration of that reply.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty notice specificity: lack of clarity requires proof of actual prejudice before challenging tax penalties.
    Penalty notices under Section 271(1)(c) read with Section 274 must clearly communicate the specific charge to secure a fair hearing; failure to object during proceedings may constitute acquiescence. Procedural defects do not invalidate penalty proceedings unless the affected party proves actual prejudice, and the burden of demonstrating such prejudice lies with the party alleging breach of natural justice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be presumed from mere disallowance; defective notices and bona fide claims constrain penalties.
    Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income requires proof of knowingly misstated or concealed particulars; mere disallowance of a claim does not suffice. A bona fide, arguable claim should not automatically attract penalty, and a defective or unadapted notice that fails to demonstrate application of mind can vitiate penalty proceedings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Furnishing inaccurate particulars: claiming non existent depreciation can attract penalty even without willful concealment; notice must be specific.
    Claiming depreciation on non existent assets constitutes furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under the penalty provision; proof of willful concealment is not a necessary ingredient for civil penalty liability. Notices initiating penalty proceedings must be specific and clear to meet natural justice requirements, and factual admissions and reversal of disputed claims are operative in determining whether inaccurate particulars were furnished.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tender cancellations: ensure opportunity to be heard; flexibility applies where no actual prejudice arises.
    Natural justice in tender cancellation requires affected parties be given an opportunity to meet allegations; the case highlights an e tender interrupted by an ex parte inquiry, cancellation without prior notice, and allegations of bias. These procedural deficiencies implicate the audi alteram partem principle and render such cancellations arbitrary where parties are not afforded a fair chance to respond. The analysis notes natural justice is flexible and, in absence of actual prejudice, its breach may not invalidate administrative action, while stressing transparency and balanced procedural fairness by public bodies.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice requires municipal demolition actions to provide adequate notice and a fair hearing before affecting property rights.
    The judgment requires municipal enforcement actions affecting immovable property to rest on clear statutory authority and to respect constitutional property rights, insisting that dispossession or demolition follow lawful procedure. It mandates observance of natural justice, specifically adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard, and embeds these procedural safeguards within principles of transparency, proportionality, and reasoned municipal decision making.
    Case LawsFEMA
    Show AI Summary
    Disclosure obligations ensure accused access to relevant evidence, preserving fair trial rights in FEMA proceedings.
    Disclosure obligations under the Foreign Exchange Management Act require enforcement authorities to furnish accused persons with all relevant documents and evidence to enable preparation of defence, reflecting the right to a fair hearing and natural justice. Investigative confidentiality may justify limited nondisclosure only when authorities demonstrate specific harm, and any withholding must be narrowly tailored, with reasoned determinations that preserve core procedural fairness in FEMA adjudications.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Customs Penalty Jurisdiction affirmed where under invoicing and dual invoicing indicate participation in duty evasion scheme.
    Imposition of penalties under Section 112(a) for alleged under invoicing and dual invoicing was sustained on the basis that receipt of part consideration and issuance of false invoices constituted participation in a scheme to evade customs duty; the offences were treated as occurring within India so the Customs Act applied, co noticee settlements did not extend immunity to others, and a jurisdictional challenge to DRI authority was found inapplicable to the notice issued.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to file return on time triggers penalty under Section 271F even if return is later filed after reassessment notice.
    The summary addresses penalty liability for failing to file the original income tax return by the statutory due date, noting that later filing in response to a reassessment notice does not excuse the late original filing. It emphasizes that initiation of penalty proceedings after completion of reassessment does not automatically vitiate the penalty, and that absence of a valid reason for delay sustains penal consequences under the provision for non-filing.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Burden to prove unaccounted income: additions require admissible evidence, not assumptions from survey reports.
    Burden to prove alleged unaccounted income lies with the revenue; additions based on survey findings and an Inspector's report to re fix sale prices must be supported by admissible evidence. The taxpayer used the percentage of completion method for construction income, and impounded documents from a statutory survey were central to the dispute. Additions founded mainly on assumptions or inspector notes, without corroborative proof linking seized material to unexplained receipts, are susceptible to appellate review.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Depreciation on aircraft recognized when operational preparations precede airworthiness certificate, affecting tax depreciation timing.
    The tribunal treated preparatory expenditures to make a newly acquired aircraft operational as integral to business activity for determining the timing of depreciation, remitted the classification and amortisation of engine improvement and overhaul costs to the assessing officer, allowed component replacement and repair costs as revenue deductions because they did not extend useful life, and confirmed that interest on TDS is not an allowable deduction.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing adjustments shape ALP analysis and documentation requirements for royalties and management fees.
    Dispute involves deductibility of cross border reimbursement payments under Section 37 and whether assessing authorities recorded specific factual findings and afforded fair opportunity before disallowance. Related issues include entitlement to refund of excess Dividend Distribution Tax under the DTAA and the correct application of the Arm's Length Principle-notably choice between TNMM and CUP-for benchmarking royalty and management fees, with emphasis on documentation and comparability analysis.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Locus standi in insolvency proceedings: standing requires a direct, legitimate interest to initiate or challenge IBC processes.
    The commentary examines locus standi under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, focusing on entitlement to initiate, challenge and participate in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. It highlights procedural interactions among the financial creditor, resolution professional and Committee of Creditors, and discusses contested applications for extension of plan implementation, protection of bank guarantees and permission for fresh bids where a bidder failed to perform. The piece stresses that standing depends on a direct, legitimate interest and that courts apply a stringent interest based test when admitting challenges or procedural relief in IBC proceedings.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Shareholder locus standi constrained in insolvency; CoC commercial wisdom insulated from judicial interference absent material illegality.
    Shareholder rights are substantially curtailed after commencement of CIRP: shareholders may file claims in liquidation but lack standing to overturn CoC commercial decisions. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors is entitled to deference and is reviewable by courts only for material irregularity or legal violation; procedural objections and requests for forensic audit must demonstrate such material illegality to unsettle an approved resolution plan under the IBC.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Instalment payments: courts permit flexible tax instalment schedules for financially distressed corporates while respecting lower court discretion.
    The courts endorsed a flexible instalment framework permitting extension and adjustment of tax payment schedules when a corporate taxpayer demonstrates reduced capacity to pay, including temporary reduction of individual instalments with deficits spread over remaining payments. The appellate decision upheld the lower court's discretion, emphasising deference absent clear error and supporting reasonableness and proportionality in accommodating financial distress while preserving eventual recovery of assessed liabilities.

    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 270 "Assessment" 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 270 Assessment

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The document is Clause 270 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (old version) setting out the procedure for processing returns and making assessments. It matters because it prescribes grounds for automated adjustments, timelines for intimation/notice and limited inquiry powers for the Assessing Officer; these affect taxpayers, assessing authorities and administrative processes. Effective dates or enactment details: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 270 in the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Procedure for assessment). The clause governs processing of returns made u/s 263 or in response to a notice u/s 268(1), providing: (i) specified grounds on which the total income or loss may be adjusted at the return-processing stage, (ii) computation and adjustment of tax/interest/fee and refund, (iii) communication/intimation requirements, (iv) limited enquiry powers via notices, and (v) special sequencing when dealing with certain exempt/non-profit entities (cross-references to section 11, section 45(3)(a), Schedule III, section 351). Definitions: The clause defines "an incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return" (sub-section (5)(a)(i)-(iii)). Other terms used: "acknowledgement of the return" is specified to be deemed intimation in certain cases (sub-section (5)(b)).

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Coverage: Clause 270 applies where return is filed u/s 263 or in response to u/s 268(1) notice. It authorises processing that may include adjustments for (i) arithmetical errors, (ii) incorrect claims apparent from the return, (iii) disallowance of loss where the return for the year to be set off was furnished beyond the due date u/s 263(1), (iv) disallowance or increase in income indicated in the audit report but not taken into account, and (v) disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 144 or Chapter VIII if return was filed beyond the due date. It requires computation of tax/interest/fee on adjusted income, adjusts payments (TDS/TCS/advance tax/rebate/self-assessment/other payments) to determine sum payable or refundable, prepares/generates and sends intimation and grants refunds accordingly.

      Interpretation

      Legislative intent and interpretive principles indicated: The clause intends to authorise summary processing of returns to correct manifest errors or inconsistencies without invoking full assessment proceedings, subject to communication and limited opportunity to respond. The inclusion of "apparent from any information in the return" as a ground suggests a narrow, objective standard for some adjustments (entries or missing supporting information). The requirement to consider any response within thirty days indicates an intent to afford procedural fairness at the processing stage. The three-month limit for notices and nine-month limit for intimation indicate legislative emphasis on expedition and finality at the return-processing stage.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Carve-outs and conditions: Before adjustments under sub-section (1)(a), the clause requires that the assessee be intimated of such adjustments in writing or electronically and be allowed to respond; if no response within thirty days, adjustments may be made. Sub-section (4) bars sending an intimation after nine months from the end of the financial year in which the return is made. Sub-section (9) bars serving the notice under sub-section (8) after three months from the end of the financial year in which the return is furnished. Special sequencing applies for entities covered by sub-section (11) (research associations, associations/institutions in Schedule III) - no order under sub-section (10) shall be made without giving effect to section 11 unless the Assessing Officer has intimated Central Government/prescribed authority and approval has been withdrawn/rescinded. For registered non-profit organisations, the Assessing Officer must send a reference to the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner before making assessment and cannot make an assessment without giving effect to the order passed u/s 351(2)(ii)(A) or (B).

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A return discloses an arithmetic miscalculation in taxable income; the Assessing Officer issues an intimation explaining the arithmetical correction, allows the assessee thirty days to respond, and if no reply is received, adjusts income and computes tax and refund as per sub-section (1). (Consistent with the text.)
      • Example 2: A taxpayer claims a deduction in excess of statutory percentage without furnishing prescribed supporting information in the return; under sub-section (5)(a)(ii)-(iii) this may be treated as an "incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return" and adjusted at processing stage after intimation. (Consistent with the text.)

      Interplay

      Interaction with other provisions mentioned: The clause refers to sections 263, 268(1), 263(1), 144, Chapter VIII, Chapter IX (rebates/relief), section 11 (charitable trusts/approved entities), Schedule III (Table Sl. No. 23-25), section 351 (registered non-profit violations), section 45(3)(a) (entities such as universities/colleges). The text mandates procedural sequencing so that approvals/notifications relevant to exempt entities are handled (intimation to Central Government/prescribed authority, withdrawal/rescission) prior to making assessment. No other Rules/Notifications/Circulars are referenced in the provision itself.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Terminology and placement of certain phrases: The Act version (Document 1) consistently uses phrasing such as "an intimation shall be sent" and "the acknowledgement of the return shall be deemed to be the intimation" while the Bill version (Document 2) uses "an intimation is to be given" or "an intimation shall be prepared or generated and sent."
        • Practical impact: Largely drafting/administrative - the Act text in Document 1 is marginally more prescriptive about issuance of intimation and the mechanism for acknowledgement; no substantive legal effect discernible from the text alone.
      • Additional adjustment ground in the Act: Document 1 (Section 270) includes clause (1)(a)(iii) addressing "any such inconsistency in the return, with respect to the information in the return of any preceding tax year, as may be prescribed." This clause is not present in the Bill text (Document 2).
        • Practical impact: The Act explicitly permits prescribed cross-year consistency checks as a basis for adjustment when processing returns, expanding the grounds for automatic adjustment compared to the Bill. This increases the potential scope for adjustments without separate assessment proceedings where cross-year inconsistency is apparent and prescribed.
      • Processing consequence after intimation/assessment: Document 2 uses "shall be prepared or generated and sent" for intimation under clause (1)(d); Document 1 says "an intimation shall be sent."
        • Practical impact: Minor; Document 2 may be read as acknowledging automated/intangible generation mechanisms; Document 1 is marginally more streamlined.
      • Additional safeguards for non-profit entities/universities: Document 1 contains further detailed provisions (sub-sections (11)-(15)) with cross-references to sections 11, 45(3)(a), 351(1) etc., that are substantially similar to Document 2 but Document 1 includes explicit provisos about procedure (e.g., corrigenda note referencing "previous" corrected).
        • Practical impact: Substantive protections and procedural sequencing appear materially similar in both; Document 1 adds small clarifications but no new substantive bar beyond those in Document 2.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers must ensure correctness and sufficient supporting information in the return because "incorrect claims apparent from any information in the return" can be disallowed at processing stage. Late filing of a return for a year from which losses are to be set off may lead to disallowance of that loss at processing stage. Entities getting audit reports should ensure audit-report indicated adjustments are reflected in the return to avoid disallowance at processing.
      • Record-keeping/evidence points: Since adjustments may be made on the basis of entries apparent on the return, taxpayers should maintain contemporaneous records and ensure details and prescribed supporting particulars are filed with returns. Retention of documents supporting deductions and percentages is critical because failure to furnish the information in the return itself can trigger adjustment without a full assessment.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 270 authorises summary processing of returns to correct arithmetical errors and certain "apparent" incorrect claims without full assessment proceedings.
      • Taxpayers get a thirty-day opportunity to respond to proposed processing adjustments; absence of reply allows adjustments to proceed.
      • There are strict timelines for administrative action: notices under sub-section (8) must be issued within three months of year-end; intimations must be sent within nine months.
      • Special procedural sequencing protects certain exempt/non-profit entities: Assessing Officer must inform Central Government/prescribed authority and allow withdrawal/rescission processes before assessment under sub-section (10).
      • "Incorrect claim apparent from any information in the return" is defined narrowly by reference to inconsistency, absence of required information, or exceeding specified statutory limits.
      • Processing stage adjustments can lead to immediate demand or refund determination; amounts paid at processing may be applied against subsequent regular assessments.
      • Taxpayers should ensure accuracy and completeness of the return, timely filing, and attachment of prescribed information to reduce risk of summary disallowances.

      Full Text:

      Section 270 Assessment

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax