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
    Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
    Case LawsService Tax
    Navigating the Taxation Labyrinth: The Supreme Court's Guidance on Transfer of Right to Use Goods
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Earnest-Money Deposits under SARFAESI Rules
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    The Generality vs. Enumeration Principle: A Key to Interpreting Delegated Rule-Making Power: Validit...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Ensuring Fair Procedure before declaring Fraud in Bank Loan: Providing Relevant Documents and Opport...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
    Decoding the Judgement: Navigating the Complexities of ITC Eligibility under the GST Regime
    Excess stock found during survey: Navigating the Intricacies of UPGST / CGST Act and Invoking Wrong ...
    Striking a Balance: Judicial Interpretation of GST Provisions on Record-Keeping and Penalties
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Orders and the Limits of Article 142: Safeguarding Natural Justice Balancing Judicial Powers...
    Upholding Fairness and Transparency in Insolvency Resolution: A Landmark Judgment on the IBC
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Supreme Court Clarifies Vicarious Liability of Directors in Cheque Dishonour Cases
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Interim Compensation in Cheque Dishonor Cases: Discretion and Due Process, Scope of the word "May"
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Unraveling the Principles of Delay Condonation: A Comprehensive Analysis by the Supreme Court
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
    Case LawsCustoms
    Monetary Limits for Filing Appeals: Analyzing the CESTAT Judgment on Binding Nature of CBIC Instruct...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
❯❯
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
    Transfer of assessment proceedings for coordinated investigations and administrative convenience upheld where procedural safeguards and factual links exist.
    The judgment explains that transfers of assessment proceedings pursuant to the statutory transfer power may be justified for coordinated enquiries and administrative convenience, provided the decision is not capricious or mala fide. Authorities must afford an opportunity to be heard and consider objections; where factual indicia exist - for example, disclosed transactions such as unsecured loans with searched persons - centralisation can be sustained. The convenience of the assessee is relevant but subservient to effective adjudication and tax collection, and transfers supported by procedural compliance and factual nexus are not arbitrary.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer of right to use goods: contracts retaining operational control are service arrangements, not deemed sales under VAT.
    The issue is whether supply agreements for cranes, trailers and tank trucks amount to a transfer of the right to use goods under the deemed sale provision. Applying the five BSNL tests-availability of goods, consensus on identity, transferee's legal right to use, exclusivity of use, and non transferability by owner-the contracts failed to meet the criteria. Contractors retained possession, crew, fuel, maintenance and liability, and transferees had only permissive use without effective control, so the arrangements were services, not deemed sales under VAT/sales tax.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Forfeiture of earnest-money deposits under SARFAESI rules stands as a statutory consequence, limiting equitable intervention.
    The analysis affirms that Rule 9(5) of the SARFAESI Rules prescribes an express statutory forfeiture of earnest-money deposits arising from auction terms, and that Sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, addressing contractual damages, do not apply to such statutory forfeitures. Unjust enrichment and equitable considerations cannot supplant a clear statutory forfeiture, and subsequent recovery by the secured creditor does not negate the forfeiture, except in narrowly defined exceptional circumstances where equity may justify relief.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Generality vs. enumeration principle affirms broad delegated rule making power, upholding rules that further an Act's statutory purposes.
    The Court held that Rule 9(3) is intra vires because the general delegated rule making power in section 29A(1) authorises rules that carry out the Act's purposes even when not covered by enumerated heads. Applying the generality vs. enumeration principle, the Court found the enumerated matters in section 29A(2) illustrative and not restrictive, and concluded Rule 9(3) furthers the misconduct chapter's object of maintaining ethical standards and preventing wrongful threshold dismissal of genuine complaints.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Burden of proof in share premium cases: failure to prove investor identity and genuineness sustains addition under section 68.
    The assessment of share premium under section 68 requires the assessee to prove the identity, creditworthiness and genuineness of investors who subscribe at a premium. The court scrutinised disparate allotments made on consecutive days, examined subscribing companies' financials, and applied the doctrine of "source of source" restrictively, holding that incorporation papers or bank payments alone do not discharge the burden. Absent cogent evidence tracing funds to lawful origin and demonstrating commercial rationale for large premiums, additions under section 68 are supportable.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Strict construction of penalty provisions prevents penalty where taxpayer disclosed omitted income before assessment notice.
    The legal focal point is whether Section 271(1)(c) can be invoked where an assessee disclosed omitted income and paid differential tax before initiation of reassessment. Penal provisions require strict construction, and Explanation 1 treats a pre-notice satisfactory explanation and admission of additional income as accepted, precluding characterization as concealment. Additionally, a penalty notice must specify the particular ground for proceeding; failure to do so renders the notice defective and undermines the basis for penalty.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Right to be heard: affected parties must receive documents underlying fraud allegations and be allowed inspection and rebuttal.
    Classification of a loan account as fraud invokes the Principles of Natural Justice, requiring disclosure of the documents forming the basis of a Show Cause Notice and inspection access to bank and Resolution Professional records so the affected party can identify required documents, receive copies, and submit a meaningful reply within specified timelines, with scope to request a personal hearing.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Scope of reassessment: AO may address newly noticed income but remains constrained by the recorded reasons for reopening.
    Where the AO has recorded reasons to believe income escaped assessment, the AO may assess or reassess issues that come to notice during reassessment, but if no additions or modifications are ultimately made in respect of the issues that formed the basis for reopening, the AO cannot make additions or modifications relating solely to other matters that were part of the original assessment. Explanation 3 applies only after reassessment power is validly invoked and cannot be used to deviate from or supplant the recorded reasons.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Corroboration requirement for search statements: unsupported search statements cannot sustain additions without linked incriminating material and fair cross examination.
    Additions for alleged accommodation entries cannot rest solely on statements recorded during search operations; such statements require corroboration by material found in the search that is specifically linked to the assessee. The assessing officer must articulate a factual nexus between seized group material and the assessee, and procedural fairness-including provision of relevant statements and opportunity for cross-examination-is essential. Cure provisions do not validate jurisdictional defects arising from absence of requisite notice or lack of incriminating material.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility clarified: refund for unutilised ITC limited to inverted duty where input goods tax exceeds output supplies.
    The court construes Section 54(3) narrowly: refund of unutilised ITC for inverted duty arises only where tax on input goods exceeds tax on output supplies. It upholds the constitutional validity of Section 16(2)(c) and Section 16(4), confirms that ITC is subject to legislatively prescribed conditions and time limits, and clarifies that the non-obstante clause in Section 16(2) does not override separate restrictions such as Section 16(4). Affected petitioners may invoke circulars and have eligible ITC claims processed where returns met the prescribed extended filing position.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Determination of tax on unaccounted stock must proceed under Sections 73 and 74, not Section 130.
    The Court held that tax determination for excess or unaccounted stock discovered in a survey must proceed under the statutory assessment procedures for undisclosed goods rather than by invoking the survey provision. The assessment code prescribes the exclusive mechanism for quantifying and demanding tax, and survey powers cannot be used to supplant the prescribed steps for computation, notice and imposition of tax or penalty on unaccounted goods.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Record-keeping obligations: failure attracts a capped statutory penalty and invalidates arbitrary confiscation without due process.
    The judgment emphasises that registered persons must maintain prescribed books and electronic records under Section 35 and related rules, and that any determination of tax on unaccounted goods must follow the show cause procedures for assessing tax liability. It finds that conditions for confiscation under Section 130 were not met and that penalties must be imposed in accordance with the statutory bifurcation in Section 122, with the offences in question attracting only the capped penalty, thereby underscoring procedural limits on enforcement powers.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Limits on Article 142: extraordinary power cannot automatically vacate interim stays; natural justice and supervisory jurisdiction must be preserved.
    Limits on the Supreme Court's extraordinary jurisdiction were defined to prevent blanket, time based vacation of interim stays; equitable power cannot deprive non parties of substantive benefits or negate the right to be heard. The Court confined vacation rules to cases where interim relief was granted without notice, instructed High Courts to grant limited ad interim relief, prioritise vacation applications, avoid routine time bound disposal directives, and recognised that past automatic vacations that led to concluded trials raise finality concerns while endorsing judicial superintendence and natural justice as constitutional constraints.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Insolvency plan compliance: failure to acknowledge creditor claims or secure approvals undermines approved resolution plans.
    The court held that a recall application grounded in lack of notice and alleged misrepresentation is maintainable under principles of natural justice. It found the resolution plan non-compliant with Section 30(2) read with Regulations 37 and 38-specifically for failing to acknowledge a creditor's claim, misrecording the payable amount, omitting secured creditor classification despite a charge, and proposing use of third-party statutory land without necessary approvals-deficiencies that materially affected the plan's transparency and treatment of creditor classes.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Vicarious liability of directors clarified: specific averments required to link a director to company affairs before liability attaches.
    The Court held that vicarious liability of a director in cheque dishonour cases cannot be invoked by merely reproducing statutory language or alleging directorship; complaints must contain specific factual averments showing how the director was responsible for or in charge of the company's day to day affairs to link the director to issuance or dishonour of negotiable instruments.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Interim compensation discretion: courts must prima facie assess claims and defences before ordering payment under Section 143A.
    The Court interpreted Section 143A(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act as conferring a discretionary power to order interim compensation, holding that the word "may" cannot be read as mandatory. Courts must prima facie assess the complainant's case and the accused's defence; the presumption under section 139 alone does not suffice. Interim compensation may be directed only when a prima facie case is established, with the quantum determined after considering transaction nature, parties' relationship, and the accused's paying capacity, and brief reasons must be recorded.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay: courts require sufficient cause, balancing strict limitation rules with liberal remedial discretion.
    Principles of condonation of delay require balancing the Limitation Act's public policy against stale litigation: Section 3 is to be strictly interpreted while Section 5 is to be construed liberally to allow judicial discretion where sufficient cause is shown. Discretion remains limited by considerations such as inordinate delay, negligence, and lack of due diligence, and prior decisions granting condonation do not automatically justify relief unless the factual matrices are substantially similar.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Registration under Section 80G: provisional approval permits subsequent final registration regardless of prior commencement of activities.
    The Tribunal held that institutions granted provisional approval under the First Proviso to Section 80G(5) are entitled to apply for final registration under the proviso's final-registration clause, and that the relevant date of commencement is to be counted from activities undertaken after grant of provisional registration; a prior commencement of activities before provisional grant cannot alone justify rejection of a final-approval application.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Binding nature of departmental instructions vs natural justice: tribunals may prioritize procedural fairness over monetary thresholds.
    The CESTAT held that CBIC instructions bind departmental officers but do not bind courts and tribunals, which must safeguard natural justice. The Tribunal found the appellate order defective for failing to remit valuation reassessment to the proper officer as statutorily required, treated related Bills of Entry as a single transaction for monetary limit calculation, and invoked its procedural power to hear departmental appeals on merits despite the Board's monetary threshold.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Search assessment provisions under Sections 153A and 153C override ordinary reassessment time limits; asset-threshold verification required.
    The judgment holds that search-triggered assessment provisions function as non-obstante clauses displacing ordinary reassessment time limits, distinguishes the enduring liability to tax from the temporal right to assess, prescribes that block periods are computed from the year of search (or date of receipt of seized records for non-searched persons), and treats the asset-represented income threshold as a mandatory, aggregable precondition requiring the assessing officer's recorded satisfaction.

    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 292 "Assessment of total undisclosed income as a result of search." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      10 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 292 Assessment of total undisclosed income as a result of search.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 292 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - (Old Version) sets out a special procedure for assessment in cases of search or requisition, providing for block period assessment and abatement of parallel assessment proceedings. It matters to taxpayers subject to search or requisition, the income-tax department and practitioners handling search-assessment litigation. Effective date: "on or after the commencement of this Act" (as stated).

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause 292 is placed in Part B entitled "Special procedure for assessment of search cases" of the Income Tax Bill, 2025. It governs assessment of "income pertaining to the block period" where a search is initiated or requisition made. The clause interacts with provisions on references to the Board u/s 166 and cross-references section 293 (for computation/definition of block period income) and section 192 (for the tax rate to be applied). The Bill does not set forth definitions within Clause 292; any definitions of "block period," "search," "requisition," or "undisclosed income" are not stated in the clause itself.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 292(1) commands that irrespective of other provisions of the Act, where a search is initiated or requisition made on or after commencement, the Assessing Officer shall proceed to assess or reassess the total income of the block period as per this Chapter. The compulsion is comprehensive ("irrespective of any other provision"), indicating a special, paramount assessment route for search cases. Clause 292(6) provides that income other than undisclosed income of the tax year in which the last authorisation for search is executed should be assessed separately under other provisions of the Act. Clause 292(7) prescribes charging tax on the "total income pertaining to the block period" at the rate specified in section 192, irrespective of the tax year(s) to which such income pertains.

      Interpretation

      The text suggests legislative intent to centralise assessment dimensions arising out of searches into a block assessment calendar, to avoid multiplicity of parallel proceedings for the same block-period income. The non-obstante language in clause (1) and (2) indicates a deliberate statutory priority to the Chapter's procedures over ordinary year-wise assessments for years within the block period. Clause (5)'s revival mechanism indicates an intent to preserve the department's recourse if a block assessment is annulled - abated proceedings are capable of revival upon annulment of the Chapter's proceedings. Overall, the clause reflects an intent to provide a distinct, consolidated regime for search-related assessments, to streamline assessment and to protect revenue via revival mechanisms.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Clause 292(4) carves out cases where multiple searches/requisitions occur: if a subsequent search/requisition requires assessment under the Chapter, any pending assessment under the Chapter shall be completed first; then assessment for the subsequent search shall follow; if the remaining period for the subsequent assessment is less than three months, the period is to be extended to three months from the end of the month in which the earlier assessment was completed. This is a procedural proviso ensuring adequate time for downstream assessments. No other provisos (such as thresholds or exemptions) appear in the clause.

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A search is initiated on 1 April 2025 covering a block period comprising financial years 2018-19 to 2023-24. Clause 292(1) requires the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess the total income of that block period under the Chapter. Year-wise assessments pending for those years would abate under clause (2).
      • Example 2: If a notice for assessment under ordinary provisions was issued for a tax year within the block period after the date of search but before the order under the Chapter is made, clause (2) provides that such proceedings shall abate. Clause (5) contemplates revival if the Chapter's proceeding is later annulled in appeal.

      Interplay

      Clause 292 cross-refers to section 166 (references to the Board), section 293 (computation/definition of block period income) and section 192 (tax rate). It establishes that proceedings under other provisions of the Act for years in the block period abate and are deemed to have abated. Clause 6 preserves separate assessment of non-undisclosed income of the year of last search authorisation under general provisions. Clause 5 allows revival of abated proceedings should Chapter proceedings be annulled, indicating procedural interplay with appellate processes. The clause does not mention rules, forms, or timelines beyond the three-month extension in clause (4)(c).

      Differences between (Document 1) Section 292 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and (Document 2) Clause 292 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - (Old Version)

      • Title / Description: Document 1 is presented as "Section 292" of the enacted Income-tax Act, 2025 (heading: "Assessment of total undisclosed income as a result of search"). Document 2 is the "Clause 292" from the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version (heading: "Assessment of income pertaining to the block period").
        • Practical impact: The enacted version uses the phrase "total undisclosed income" whereas the Bill used "total income" (or "total income pertaining to the block period" in sub-clause (7)). This narrows the focus in the enacted Act to undisclosed income, which has implications for scope of taxation and assessment - assessments under the enacted provision are directed at undisclosed income, not all income of the block period.
      • Reference to Parts/Chapters: The Bill (Document 2) repeatedly refers to "this Chapter." The enacted Section (Document 1) refers to "this Part."
        • Practical impact: Terminology change may reflect structural changes in the statute; substantively this is a drafting/organizational change rather than a change in substantive operation, but it may affect cross-references elsewhere in the Act.
      • Substantive Wording - Clause (1): Bill: "the Assessing Officer shall proceed to assess or reassess the total income of the block period as per this Chapter." Enacted: "the Assessing Officer shall proceed to assess or reassess the total undisclosed income of the block period as per provisions of this Part."
        • Practical impact: As above, enacted text confines assessment to undisclosed income rather than "total income," narrowing taxable base within the block assessment procedure.
      • Sub-clause (2)(b) in Enacted vs single (2) in Bill: The Bill has a single sub-section (2) stating abatement of pending proceedings. The enacted Section expands and divides subsection (2) into (2)(a) and (2)(b), and adds specific language about notices issued during the search-to-order period and abatement deemed on date of issue of such notice.
        • Practical impact: Enacted text gives more granular treatment to proceedings for tax years in the block period where notices were issued during the search window; it clarifies that such proceedings abate and are deemed to have abated on the date of issue of the notice. This may affect calculation of limitation or procedural rights when notices are issued during the pendency of a search-related assessment.
      • Sub-clause (3): Both documents have a provision about references u/s 166(1) or orders u/s 166(6) abating; the enacted version expressly states the reference/order along with proceedings shall abate "and shall be deemed to have abated on the date referred to in sub-section (2)." Bill says they "shall abate on the date referred to in sub-section (2)."
        • Practical impact: Largely drafting parity; enacted version echoes the deeming language used elsewhere.
      • Sub-clause numbering and (5) scope: Bill's clause (5) provides revival where any proceeding "initiated or completed under this Chapter has been annulled." Enacted clause (5) limits the overriding saving to "Irrespective of anything contained in this part or section 286," and links annulment of a proceeding initiated under this part or any order of assessment/reassessment made u/s 294(1)(c) with revival of abated proceedings.
        • Practical impact: Enacted text narrows the cross-over by specifically tying revival to annulment of assessment or order under specific section 294(1)(c) and by adding reference to section 286 and the Part; it also clarifies the administrative step (revival effective on receipt by Principal Commissioner/Commissioner). This changes procedural mechanics and the authority for revival.
      • Sub-clause (7) differences - cross-reference and terminology: Bill: "The total income pertaining to the block period, as referred to in section 293(5) shall be charged to tax at the rate specified in section 192." Enacted: "The total undisclosed income relating to the block period, as referred to in section 293(7) shall be charged to tax at the rate specified in section 192 as income of the block period."
        • Practical impact: Enacted text both changes the cross-reference (s.293(7) vs s.293(5)) and substitutes "total undisclosed income" for "total income," and expressly states it is "as income of the block period." This aligns with the enacted focus on undisclosed income and may alter rate application depending on how section 293 and section 192 are structured in the final Act. Cross-reference changes could affect interpretive linkages with section 293.
      • Miscellaneous drafting differences: Minor differences in wording (e.g., "Irrespective of anything contained in any other provision of this Act" in the Bill vs "Irrespective of anything contained in this part or section 286" in enacted text).
        • Practical impact: Enacted limitation to "this part or section 286" could restrict the broadness of non-obstante clause compared to the Bill's broader sweep; this may change how other provisions operate vis-`a-vis block assessment provisions.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers carrying on activity subject to a search should expect consolidated block assessment procedures and likely abatement of concurrent year-wise assessments. There is an increased risk of comprehensive assessment of all block period income under the Chapter regime rather than piecemeal year-wise scrutiny.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The clause implies the need to preserve documentation relevant to the entire block period; the statutory abatement of year-wise proceedings means evidence must support positions across years. While the clause does not prescribe specific records, the practical consequence is wide-ranging documentary preservation to defend aggregate assessments.

      Key Takeaways

      • The Bill centralises assessment for search/requisition cases into a block assessment procedure overriding ordinary year-wise assessments.
      • Pending assessments for tax years within the block period abate upon initiation of search or requisition.
      • Multiple searches trigger a sequential completion rule; time for subsequent assessments is extended to a minimum three months if necessary.
      • Abated proceedings may revive if the Chapter's proceedings are annulled on appeal or other legal proceedings.
      • Income other than undisclosed income for the year of last authorisation is to be assessed separately under ordinary provisions.
      • Tax on block period income is to be charged at the rate in section 192, irrespective of year-wise incidence.
      • Clause is drafted to prioritise department's consolidated assessment approach; taxpayers should plan comprehensive record retention for the block period.

      Full Text:

      Section 292 Assessment of total undisclosed income as a result of search.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax