Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ 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 characters 0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

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.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Retrospective Amendments and the Doctrine of Vested Rights: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Upholding Equality: HC Strikes Down Discriminatory Circular on Charitable Trust Approvals
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Review of Income Tax Settlement Commission (ITSC) Orders: Navigating the Boundaries
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Assessee's Lackadaisical Conduct Leads to Dismissal of Income Tax Appeal
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Faceless Appeal Scheme: Lessons from the Judgement on Delayed Filing and Deduction u/...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Unraveling the Maze of Round-Tripping: The Doctrine of "Source of Source" in Share Capital Transacti...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Upholding the Transfer of Assessment Proceedings u/s 127: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Share Premium Addition u/s 68: Demystifying Share Premium Transactions
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Intricacies of Income Tax Penalty u/s 271(1)(c): Fairness in Tax Administration
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Scope and Limitations under Income Tax Act
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating the Complexities of Search and Seizure Assessments: Unraveling the Intricacies of Section...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting Section 80G Provisions: ITAT's Stance on Charitable Institution Registration
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting the Scope and Limits of Sections 153A and 153C: A Judicial Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 153C and the Necessity of AO's Satisfaction: A Detailed Judicial Analysis
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Royalty or Business Income? High Court Clarifies Taxation of Remittances against Software Purchase
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessment Proceedings: Navigating the Complexities
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Faceless Assessment of Income Escaping Assessment: Validity of Notice Issued by the Jurisdictional A...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Court Upholds Deduction for Operational Hotel under Section 35AD Despite Administrative Delays
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Landmark Ruling: Leasing Businesses Entitled to Depreciation Benefits
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Court Decision on Convertible Debentures Expenses : Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Vested rights preserved against retrospective tax amendments; filings made before enactment remain effective for settlement consideration.
The court addressed whether a retrospective Finance Act amendment prohibiting settlement applications from a specified date could divest a taxpayer who filed earlier of its vested right to have the application considered. It held that retrospective legislation cannot take away rights already accrued by actions completed before enactment unless clearly intended; that section 119 confers time-extension power but cannot impose new substantive eligibility conditions; and that administrative delay by revenue does not justify denying access where an application was already filed.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reasonable classification principle: differential deadline for charitable trust tax recognition cannot lack rational basis or equality protection.
A departmental circular extended a filing deadline for tax recognition to mitigate hardship but excluded newly formed charitable trusts without offering reasons; the exclusion lacked an intelligible differentia and rational nexus to the circular's object, making the differential treatment arbitrary and ultra vires the constitutional guarantee of equality, requiring the excluded applications to be treated as within time and decided on merits.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
ITSC jurisdiction extends beyond application disclosures, while full and true disclosure and narrow judicial review govern settlement oversight.
The Income Tax Settlement Commission may inquire into and decide issues disclosed in the application and any other matters relating to the case as reflected in the Commissioner's report or uncovered by further inquiry; full and true disclosure is mandatory and amendments or contradictory positions that undermine that requirement are impermissible, yet contesting taxability before the Commission does not automatically negate disclosure; judicial review is limited to statutory contravention, prejudice, fraud, bias or malice, while sufficiency of materials placed before the Commission is generally beyond routine court scrutiny.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Delay condonation denied where litigant's evasive conduct and non participation failed to constitute sufficient cause for appeal filing.
The court refused condonation of delay for filing an appeal where a best judgment assessment treated cash bank deposits as unexplained after the assessee failed to file returns or participate in proceedings; reliance on transition to a faceless e filing regime and lack of alerts was held insufficient, as the assessee's evasive and habitual non participation did not amount to sufficient cause warranting condonation under the applicable doctrine.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Sufficient cause for delay in filing appeals rejected where faceless scheme migration did not excuse prolonged inaction.
The court held that migration to a faceless appeal system did not, without persuasive evidence, constitute sufficient cause to condone a lengthy delay in filing an appeal, finding the explanation reflective of litigant inaction rather than unavoidable impediment. On tax deduction, the court applied authority that a non-obstante clause does not negate the employer's obligation to deposit employees' statutory contributions by the due date as a condition for claiming the deduction, and treated the appeal as meritless and barred by limitation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Source of source doctrine used to pierce the corporate veil where share capital appears round tripped among related entities.
The assessee must prove identity, genuineness and creditworthiness of investors under section 68; examination extends to the true origin of funds where bank records show circular transfers, related party directorships, lack of business operations, and arbitrary share premium, permitting lifting the corporate veil and application of the source of source doctrine to treat such receipts as not satisfactorily explained.
Case Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Seized-material nexus under Section 153C: AO must form reasoned satisfaction before reopening assessments for specific years.
Section 153C requires the Assessing Officer to form a reasoned satisfaction that seized material during a search has a bearing on an assessee's total income before initiating assessments; mere discovery is insufficient, and the AO must identify specific assessment years, map incriminating material year-wise, and record reasons to justify abatement or reopening.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Royalty classification of software payments: remittances for software purchases are not treated as royalty under established precedent.
Where distribution agreements or End User License Agreements do not grant any proprietary interest or a right to use copyright, payments for acquiring computer software are not to be characterised as royalty; this conclusion follows controlling precedent and DTAA considerations and renders an Assessing Officer's contrary classification inconsistent with the correct legal interpretation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reopening assessments: procedural compliance and substantive escapement requirements determine validity of reassessment notices.
The judgment examines validity of notices under Section 148, holding that TOLA does not apply retrospectively for the assessment year at issue and notices issued after the statutory cutoff cannot be back-dated. Notices barred by the limitation in Section 149(1) are ineffective. Procedural prerequisites - notably issuance of a Document Identification Number and issuance through automated allocation by the faceless centre rather than direct action by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer - are mandatory. Substantively, reopening requires escapement of income in the form of an asset, expenditure, transaction, event, or book entry; a mere change of opinion or dispute over an ordinarily allowed deduction does not meet that threshold.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Faceless assessment: issuance of section 148 reopening notices by jurisdictional assessing officers inconsistent with faceless regime.
The faceless assessment framework under Section 151A and the Scheme dated 29 March 2022 allocates exclusive jurisdiction to either the Faceless Assessment Officer or the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer for issuance of reopening notices and assessments; actions by an authority outside its assigned jurisdiction are inconsistent with the faceless regime and cause prejudice to the taxpayer as a matter of law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Deduction eligibility for operational hotels affirmed despite administrative delay in star classification, focusing on substantive compliance.
The court addressed entitlement to a deduction under Section 35AD(5)(aa) where a hotel began operations and generated income in the relevant year and a timely application for star classification was submitted, but formal certification was delayed due to administrative inspections; the court applied a purposive construction to allow the deduction when substantive operational conditions were satisfied and delay was not the assessee's fault.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Depreciation entitlement for leasing companies where contractual ownership and business use are established, allowing higher depreciation rates.
A lessor retains entitlement to depreciation where lease terms demonstrate exclusive ownership rights, repossession power, return obligations and inspection rights, and where the asset is used in the course of the lessor's leasing business; actual physical use by the lessor is not required. Leasing activity that functionally equates to hiring can qualify assets for an enhanced rate of depreciation despite registration in the lessee's name.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Revenue classification of debenture issuance expenses upheld as revenue expenditure despite later conversion into equity.
Expenses incurred to issue convertible debentures that are raised to provide working capital are to be treated as revenue expenditure because classification depends on the purpose and usage of the expenditure, and future conversion into shares does not change its revenue character.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Comparison of section 327 "Change in constitution of a firm." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

11 September, 2025

Contents
Acts
Rules & Regulations
Summary
Note

Note

-

Bookmark

Print

Print

Section 327 Change in constitution of a firm.

Income-tax Act, 2025

At a Glance

Clause 327 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) - provision dealing with change in constitution of a firm. It prescribes how an assessing officer should treat a partnership firm for purposes of assessment u/ss 270 or 271 when the firm's constitution changes. It affects taxpayers in partnership form and the tax department. Effective date/decision date: Not stated in the document.

Background & Scope

Statutory hooks: The provision is placed as Clause 327 under the Bill heading "Change in constitution, succession and dissolution" and references assessments u/ss 270 and 271 (these sections are cited as the assessment provisions triggering the rule). The scope covers the treatment of a partnership firm for assessment purposes "where at the time of making an assessment u/s 270 or 271, it is found that a change has occurred in the constitution of a firm." Definitions: The clause sets out, for the purposes of the provision, what constitutes a "change in the constitution" of a firm by enumerating three circumstances. No separate definitions of "firm", "partner", "admitted", or "ceased" are provided in the clause itself. The clause does not supply definitions of "assessment" beyond reference to sections 270 and 271.

Statutory Provision Mode

Text & Scope

The provision contains three operative parts: (1) an overarching rule that the assessment shall be made on the firm as constituted at the time of making the assessment; (2) an enumerated list defining "change in the constitution" comprising (a) one or more partners ceasing to be partners, (b) admission of one or more new partners subject to a continuity condition that at least one pre-existing partner remains after change, and (c) where all partners continue but there is a change in their respective shares (or the shares of some); and (3) a proviso that sub-section 2(a) shall not apply to a case where the firm is dissolved on the death of any of its partners. The clause is expressly tied to assessment proceedings u/ss 270 and 271 only.

Interpretation

The clause reflects a legislative intent to fix the taxable entity for assessment at the point of assessment-making rather than retrospectively when the facts prompting assessment occurred. The operative instruction - "assessment shall be made on the firm as constituted at the time of making the assessment" - indicates that the constitution existing at the assessment time determines who is assessed as the firm. The enumerated circumstances illustrate the types of changes that will trigger application of this rule. The continuity condition that requires at least one continuing pre-change partner when a new partner is admitted signals the legislature's concern to distinguish reorganisations that preserve firm continuity from complete transfers of business or successor entities. The death-dissolution exception indicates that a firm's dissolution by reason of a partner's death should not be treated as a partner-cessation under clause (a) for assessment allocation purposes.

Exceptions/Provisos

The only proviso is that sub-section 2(a) does not apply where the firm is dissolved on the death of a partner. There are no other carve-outs, thresholds, temporal rules, or conditions in the clause. The clause does not state whether other forms of succession, amalgamation, or assignment fall within its scope; nor does it address issues of liability of outgoing partners, successor liability, or the tax treatment of unrealised gains on change.

Illustrations

  • Example 1: Partners A, B, C are assessed u/s 270. Before the assessment is made, partner C ceases to be a partner and leaves; the assessment will be made on the firm constituted at the assessment time (i.e., A and B where they remain partners). This is consistent with clause (a). (The document supplies no numerical example; this is a schematic illustration consistent with the text.)
  • Example 2: Partners A and B admit D as a new partner but A continues in the firm. Because at least one pre-existing partner (A) continues, clause (b) applies and the assessment will be made on the firm as constituted when the assessment is made (A, B, D). Note: The document does not address tax consequences for outgoing or incoming partners. Not stated in the document.
  • Example 3: Partners A, B, C keep the same personnel but reallocate profit shares between them; such a change is expressly a change in constitution under clause (c) and the assessment will be on the firm as constituted at assessment time. The clause does not indicate if share changes affecting only profit distribution are to be treated differently for tax attribution between partners. Not stated in the document.

Interplay

The clause explicitly references assessment u/ss 270 and 271, but it does not identify any rules, notifications, or circulars that further explain or implement the provision. It does not reference other provisions dealing with succession, transfer of business, or partner liability. Potential interpretive issues may arise in relation to:

  • Determination of the "time of making the assessment" - the clause does not define when assessment is "made" for these sections (for example, original assessment versus reassessment), so interplay with procedural provisions in sections 270/271 and their rules may be required to fix the temporal point.
  • Whether cessation by retirement, retirement by agreement, insolvency of a partner, or transfer of a partner's interest outside formal dissolution falls within clause (a) - the clause lists cessation generically; further statutory or case law guidance would be required.
  • Interaction with provisions concerning transfer of assets, successor liability, or clubbing of income is not addressed in the clause and remains to be read across other parts of the Code. Not stated in the document.

Comparison of Differences and Practical Impact

Clause 327 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 (labelled "Section 327") and Clause 327 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) (labelled "Clause 327"). The two provisions are substantively similar but differ in the drafting and ordering of sub-clauses describing what constitutes a "change in the constitution" of a firm.

  • Difference in sub-clause structure: The Bill version (Clause 327) lists three distinct circumstances (partners ceasing to be partners; admission of new partners subject to a continuity condition; change in partners' shares) as separate paragraphs (a), (b), (c). The Act version (Section 327) consolidates the first two situations into paragraph (a) - "if one or more of the partners cease to be partners or one or more new partners are admitted, subject to the condition..." - and keeps change in shares as paragraph (b).
    • Practical impact: The consolidation in the Act text signals no substantive narrowing or broadening of coverage; rather it appears to be a drafting reorganisation. Both texts require at least one continuing partner when a new partner is admitted (continuity condition) and both treat changes in partners' shares as a change in constitution. The only practical effect likely to arise is on interpretive clarity: the Bill's separate enumeration may be marginally clearer when construing whether ceasing and admission are distinct events; the consolidated Act version ties cessation and admission together in the same limb. There is no express change to scope, exceptions (other than the death dissolution carve-out), or the operative assessment rule.
  • Other textual elements: Both texts contain identical provisions for assessment timing (assessment to be made on the firm as constituted at the time of making assessment) and identical proviso excluding dissolution on death from the operation of the partner-cessation limb. No additional conditions, thresholds, or procedural rules are present in either text.

Practical Implications

  • Compliance and risk areas: Taxpayers in partnership form should ensure that changes in partner composition or profit-sharing ratios are documented and that the constitution of the firm at the time of assessment is clearly ascertainable. The clause places emphasis on the constitution at the point of assessment rather than at the time of the underlying income; this may affect who is assessed and for what periods.
  • Record-keeping/evidence points: Partnerships should maintain contemporaneous records of partnership deeds, minutes evidencing admission/retirement of partners, dates of effect of share changes, and notices to tax authorities, so that the firm composition at assessment time can be proven. The clause does not specify particular documents or forms to be produced. Not stated in the document.

Key Takeaways

  • Clause 327 instructs that where a change in constitution of a firm is found at the time of assessment u/ss 270 or 271, the assessment is to be made on the firm as it exists at the time of assessment.
  • "Change in constitution" is defined to include partner cessation, admission of new partners (subject to at least one continuing partner), and changes in partners' shares.
  • The clause excludes dissolution on account of a partner's death from the operation of the partner-cessation limb.
  • The Bill version and the subsequently presented Act text differ only in the drafting arrangement of the enumerated circumstances; there is no substantive change to scope in the texts considered.
  • The clause is silent on detailed procedural implementation, timing nuances for assessment, successor liability, and treatment of outgoing partners' tax obligations - those matters would require reference to other statutory provisions or interpretive guidance. Not stated in the document.
  • Practical compliance requires careful documentation of partner changes and share allocations to establish the constitution at assessment time.

Full Text:

Section 327 Change in constitution of a firm.

Topics

Acts Income Tax