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
    NewsBills
    AMENDMENTS IN THE GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Court Upholds Deduction for Operational Hotel under Section 35AD Despite Administrative Delays
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Landmark Ruling: Leasing Businesses Entitled to Depreciation Benefits
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Court Decision on Convertible Debentures Expenses : Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judgement on Feasibility Study Costs on Project Development: Revenue or Capital Expenditure?
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Section 43B: Supreme Court Decision on Unutilised MODVAT Credit and Sales Tax Recoverable
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Failure to deduct TDS and Disallowance of expenses: Supreme Court Clarifies Retrospective Applicatio...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Deduction of Bad Debts: Supreme Court's Ruling on Section 36 Compliance and alternative claim u/s 37
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Principal-Agent Relationship in Telecom Sector and TDS u/s 194H: A Supreme Court Verdict
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Procedural Compliance vs. Substantive Justice: Balancing Procedural Rigidity and Transitional Hardsh...
    Maximizing Value in Insolvency: NCLAT Upholds CoC's Right to Negotiate Post-Challenge Mechanism
    Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Period for Appeals before NCLAT under IBC in the Digital Age: E-...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating the Bounds of Tax Law: Supreme Court's Verdict on Section 153-C Assessments
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Delhi High Court's Guiding Light on Post-Search Tax Assessments: Application of Section 153C, po...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Legal and Procedural Hurdles: A Charitable Institution's Quest for Tax Exemption and Regi...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdictional Objections in Tax Assessments: A Landmark Order
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Invalid Notices and the Importance of Proper Jurisdiction: Lessons from a High-Profile Tax Case
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Upholding Precedent: Supreme Court's Stance on Taxation of Cross-Border Software Payments (Royalty)
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    The Cross-Border Software Purchase Conundrum: Supreme Court's Clarification on TDS for Non-Resident...
    Ensuring Justice in GST Registration Cancellations: A Landmark High Court Ruling
❯❯
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
    NewsBills
    Show AI Summary
    Regularisation of cess shortfalls where non levy arose from general practice allows government to sanction corrective levy.
    Section 8A empowers the government to regularize cases of non-levy or short-levy of the compensation cess where such under-collection arose from a prevailing general practice, providing an administrative mechanism to treat practice-driven cess shortfalls as regularizable liabilities under the GST compensation framework.
    Case LawsIncome 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 LawsIncome 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 LawsIncome 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.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Classification of feasibility study costs: expansion-related studies without new assets qualify as revenue expenditure.
    Whether feasibility study expenditures are revenue or capital depends on purpose and benefit: costs to obtain an enduring benefit or create a new capital asset are capital; costs incurred to expand the same business, under unity of control and without creation of new assets, are revenue in nature.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 43B actual-payment requirement prevents deduction of unutilised MODVAT credit and sales tax recoverable balances.
    Section 43B permits deduction only for sums payable as tax, duty, cess or fee that are actually paid in the relevant previous year (or paid before the return due date where a statutory liability existed). Unutilised MODVAT credit is an entitlement to adjust future excise liabilities and not an actual payment; sales tax in a recoverable account is a cost adjustment, not discharge of statutory liability. Because no excise liability existed at the relevant year end, the proviso does not apply and such credits do not meet the Section 43B payment requirement for deduction.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective application of curative amendment to TDS deadline clarified, affecting disallowance of expenses under the tax provision.
    The Court addressed whether an amendment extending the time to deposit TDS should be applied retrospectively to govern the operation of a statutory disallowance provision. After reviewing prior amendments, explanatory materials, and precedent on curative measures, the Court characterised the later amendment as curative and directed its retrospective application to the date of insertion of the original provision, thereby affecting the applicability of the disallowance to expenses where TDS was deposited by the extended deadline.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Bad debt deduction criteria clarified under Sections 36 and 37 - stricter substantiation required; capital expenditure excluded.
    Entitlement to a bad debt deduction requires statutory compliance and adequate substantiation; an accounting write off alone does not suffice. The assessee's failure to produce coherent documentary evidence of the nature and terms of the advance, inconsistent characterisation of the payment, and the capital nature of the outflow precluded treatment as a business deduction. The general business expenditure provision does not avail items that are within or expressly excluded by the bad debt framework.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Commission characterization: discounts to franchisees are sales margins, not commission; therefore no TDS obligation under Section 194-H.
    The Court held that the characterisation of receipts as commission or brokerage under Section 194-H requires agency relationships established by control, fiduciary obligations and the ability to bind the principal. Franchisees/distributors who buy prepaid products at discounts, bear commercial risk, determine resale margins and lack pricing control operate independently. Their discounted purchase price and resale margin constitute sale proceeds, not commission for services rendered on behalf of the provider, and thus do not fall within Section 194-H's withholding obligation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural timelines for charitable registration may be treated as directory to mitigate transitional electronic filing hardships and enable merit review.
    The tribunal treated administrative timeline extensions and electronic-filing difficulties as relevant to construing statutory deadlines for charitable approval, regarding the contested filing timelines as directory rather than strictly mandatory where substantive compliance existed, and directed merit-based reconsideration instead of dismissal solely for technical delay.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    CoC negotiation rights preserved after challenge mechanism, allowing revised proposals to maximize corporate value under insolvency framework.
    The CoC retains authority to negotiate with resolution applicants and to call for revisions to resolution plans post-challenge mechanism to maximize corporate value; Regulation 39(1A) is procedural and does not bar such substantive negotiation, and the conclusion of a challenge mechanism does not vest the highest bidder with an automatic right to approval, leaving the CoC's commercial judgment paramount.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation period for IBC appeals runs from e filing date, with time to obtain certified copies excluded.
    The period for filing an appeal under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code is to be computed from the date of e filing, with allowance for later submission of a physical copy; time taken to obtain certified copies is excluded from the limitation calculation in line with the Limitation Act, producing a framework harmonising tribunal rules, statutory principles, and technological filing practices.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Incriminating evidence requirement for search-based tax assessments: without it, 153 C assessments fail; reassessment under 147/148 remains possible.
    Assessments under Section 153-C require incriminating material discovered during search and seizure; absent such material, those assessments lack evidentiary foundation and may be set aside, though the Revenue may pursue reassessment under alternate provisions if independent legal grounds exist.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Post-search assessment requires reliance on incriminating material discovered during search to validate reassessment of income.
    Post-search assessments must be founded on incriminating material discovered during the search; reassessments cannot be based on material unconnected to search records. Third party assessments require a demonstrable link between the impugned income and the incriminating material within those records. The court reaffirmed precedent distinguishing ordinary reassessment from search triggered reassessment and directed re determination consistent with those legal principles to preserve procedural fairness.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness: clarifying timing for final registration under section 80G prevents denial for pre approval activities.
    The tribunal identified procedural deficiencies in the tax authority's handling of a charity's final registration application, finding that a single short-notice hearing failed to secure adequate opportunity to be heard and underscoring procedural fairness. It further clarified that provisional approval is a predicate to applying for final registration and that activities begun prior to provisional approval do not automatically preclude later final registration, rejecting a restrictive timing construction and directing fresh consideration consistent with those legal principles.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdictional objection waiver: assessee's participation after notice bars later challenge, remedial reassessment permitted within timeframe.
    The Supreme Court held that an assessee who participates in assessment proceedings after receiving an assessment-process notice without timely challenging the assessing officer's jurisdiction is barred from later disputing that jurisdiction under the statutory limitation. It set aside the High Court's order and directed the assessing officer to complete the assessment within a short prescribed timeframe, with the proviso that the assessee may not plead limitation in that completion process.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction in tax assessments: improper issuing authority can invalidate notices and require reissuance by competent authority.
    Jurisdiction in tax assessments was the pivotal issue: the record showed assessment power lay with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), not the subordinate officer who issued the contested notice, rendering that notice issued without jurisdiction. The petition also challenged adherence to principles of natural justice. The court refrained from adjudicating the substantive assessment and demand because those aspects were subject to statutory appeal, distinguishing jurisdictional defects from appealable merits and allowing issuance by the competent authority in conformity with procedural safeguards.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxation of cross border software payments as royalty reinforced; precedent remains binding despite pending review, so withholding obligations persist.
    Supreme Court reaffirmed that payments to non residents for software are to be treated as royalty for withholding tax purposes, holding that a pending review against an earlier precedent does not suspend that precedent's application; procedural limits on review under the Code of Civil Procedure prevent indefinite postponement of settled law, requiring taxpayers and payors in cross border software transactions to comply with prevailing withholding obligations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Royalty characterisation of cross-border software dictates TDS obligations based on transaction substance and applicable DTAA.
    Whether payments to non-resident suppliers for computer software constitute royalty and attract TDS depends on the transaction's terms and economic substance; payments reflecting a one-time purchase or transfer of goods do not automatically qualify as royalty. Applicable Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) provisions that are more favourable to the taxpayer govern taxability, and withholding obligations arise only if, after applying treaty benefits and examining substance, the payment is chargeable under domestic law or the DTAA.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness: administrative cancellation of registration demands reasoned decision-making to uphold equality and due process protections.
    Procedural fairness in administrative GST cancellations is the central concern: cancellation of a proprietorship's GST registration for non-filing of returns raises whether authorities considered exceptional personal and pandemic-related circumstances before terminating registration and whether orders contain adequate, contemporaneous reasons so that affected persons can understand and challenge the basis of the action.

    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 343 "Deemed accumulated income." 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 343 Deemed accumulated income.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The provided texts comprise two versions of a statutory provision titled "Deemed accumulated income" dealing with registered non-profit organisations: (a) Clause 343 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) and (b) Section 343 as enacted in the Income-tax Act, 2025. They address calculation of a portion of regular income treated as "deemed accumulated income" and prescribe investment/deposit modes. The changes alter the reference points for reductions and slightly modify the obligation to invest. Affected parties are registered non-profit organisations and the tax department; no explicit effective date is stated in the documents.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: both texts are framed as Clause/Section 343 within the Income Tax Bill/Act, 2025, and they interact with sections 341, 342 and 350 as referenced. The subject matter is the taxation/administration of income of registered non-profit organisations - specifically a deemed accumulation rule. The documents provide no further definitions or explanatory notes beyond the clause text itself.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      • Both versions provide a two-paragraph provision. Core content in the Old Bill (Clause 343) is: (1) The regular income, reduced by the application of income and accumulated income u/s 342, to the extent of 15% of regular income, shall be considered deemed accumulated income and shall be invested or deposited in any of the modes permitted u/s 350; (2) such deemed accumulated income shall not be considered accumulated income for purposes of section 342.
      • The enacted Section 343 alters the text as follows: (1) Regular income is reduced by application of income "as per the provisions of section 341 and accumulated or set apart income u/s 342," to the extent of 15% of regular income, and "where such deemed accumulated income is invested or deposited, it shall be invested or deposited in any of the modes permitted u/s 350"; (2) the same exclusion from section 342 is retained.
      • Coverage: The provision establishes an amount equal to 15% of regular income (subject to stated reductions) as "deemed accumulated income" for registered non-profit organisations, and addresses investment/deposit modalities and non-treatment as accumulated income u/s 342.

      Interpretation

      The texts supply limited interpretive guidance. Legislative intent can only be partially inferred from word choice differences. The Bill's language appears to mandate that the deemed amount "shall be invested or deposited" in modes u/s 350. The enacted section softens that imperative by qualifying it: "where such deemed accumulated income is invested or deposited, it shall be invested or deposited in any of the modes permitted u/s 350." That change suggests a legislative choice to avoid imposing an absolute duty to invest the deemed amount - instead constraining the manner of investment if the amount is in fact invested or deposited. The enacted text also adds an express cross-reference to section 341 regarding "application of income," and inserts the phrase "set apart" when referencing income u/s 342; these additions refine the base from which the 15% is calculated.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      No separate provisos, exceptions, thresholds or timing conditions are included in either text beyond the 15% quantification and the exclusion in paragraph (2). No transitional, compliance, or penalty provisions are stated.

      Interplay

      Both texts expressly cross-refer to sections 341, 342 and 350. The Bill text references only section 342 for reductions and section 350 for investment modes. The enacted section explicitly references section 341 for "application of income" and expands the description of section 342 to include "accumulated or set apart income." The enactment conditions the requirement to use modes u/s 350 on an actual investment/deposit taking place. The documents do not quote sections 341, 342 or 350; thus specifics of those interactions beyond the referral language are not stated in the documents.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: The Bill's mandatory language ("shall be invested or deposited...") imposes a clear duty to invest the deemed 15% in section 350 modes, potentially exposing organisations to compliance risk if they do not invest. The enacted wording shifts to a conditional statement, which may reduce the risk of finding a formal failure strictly on the basis that the deemed amount was not invested, while still restricting allowable investment modes where an organisation does invest or deposit the amount. This is a material compliance distinction for administrators and practitioners assessing mandatory obligations versus permitted actions.
      • Calculation base: The enacted addition of section 341 as a reduction point and the express inclusion of "set apart" income u/s 342 clarifies (relative to the Bill) the items that reduce the regular income before applying the 15% test. This narrows uncertainty about whether application u/s 341 reduces the base for deemed accumulated income; under the enacted text, it explicitly does. Practitioners will need to consult section 341 and section 342 to determine which amounts are deductible for computing the 15% base.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: Given the provision's focus on application/set-aside and investment/deposit, organisations should maintain contemporaneous records documenting (a) amounts applied pursuant to section 341, (b) amounts accumulated or set apart u/s 342, (c) the computation of the 15% deemed amount, and (d) evidence of any investment/deposit and the mode used (to show compliance with section 350 if an investment/deposit occurs). The documents do not specify particular forms or timelines for such records, so general good record-keeping is implied but not mandated in the text.

      Key Takeaways

      • Both texts create a deemed accumulated income equal to 15% of regular income subject to certain reductions and exclude that deemed amount from the operation of section 342.
      • The Old Bill mandated that the deemed amount "shall be invested or deposited" in modes u/s 350; the enacted section qualifies that requirement by making the section 350 constraint applicable "where such deemed accumulated income is invested or deposited."
      • The enacted text expressly references section 341 and refers to "accumulated or set apart income" u/s 342 as reductions, whereas the Bill referenced only section 342 in the reduction context.
      • The enacted change narrows the instances in which an absolute investment duty can be asserted and clarifies the deduction base, affecting compliance obligations and potential challenges.
      • No procedural, effective date, penalty, or illustrative examples are provided in either document; these details are "Not stated in the document."

      Differences between the Provisions and Practical Impact

      • Textual difference on reduction of regular income: Bill - "reduced by the application of income and accumulated income u/s 342"; Act - "reduced by the application of income as per the provisions of section 341 and accumulated or set apart income u/s 342."
        • Practical impact: The Act clarifies that application u/s 341 affects the base and expressly captures amounts "set apart" u/s 342, reducing ambiguity about what reduces regular income for the 15% calculation. Practitioners must therefore examine both sections 341 and 342 to compute the base accurately.
      • Obligation to invest/deposit: Bill - mandatory phrasing ("shall be invested or deposited in any of the modes permitted u/s 350"); Act - conditional phrasing ("where such deemed accumulated income is invested or deposited, it shall be invested or deposited in any of the modes permitted u/s 350").
        • Practical impact: The Bill creates a clearer, potentially enforceable duty to invest the deemed amount in specified modes, increasing compliance exposure. The Act appears to limit enforcement to cases where an investment/deposit actually occurs, allowing for circumstances where the deemed amount may remain uninvested without triggering the specific investment-mode requirement (though tax consequences from non-investment, if any, are not stated).
      • Terminology refinement: Act adds "set apart" and cross-references section 341; Bill lacks those specific descriptors.
        • Practical impact: Semantic refinement can alter scope of deductible/offset amounts and may affect disputes over what constitutes "accumulated" versus "set apart" income; the Act's explicit language reduces interpretive disputes by calling attention to both concepts.

      Action Points

      • Review and apply sections 341 and 342 to calculate the reduction base before computing the 15% deemed accumulated income (Act text requires consideration of section 341; Bill text does not expressly do so).
      • Maintain detailed records documenting any application, accumulation, or set-aside of income and the computation of the deemed 15% amount, and evidence of any investment/deposit and the mode used u/s 350, since the statute conditions acceptable modes on a deposit/investment occurring.
      • Where an organisation intends to invest/deposit the deemed amount, ensure the chosen mode aligns with section 350; if uncertain, consult section 350 text (not provided here) for permitted instruments.
      • Monitor whether authorities treat failure to invest the deemed amount as a breach in light of the enacted conditional language; the documents contain no penalty or remedial mechanism, therefore "Not stated in the document."

      Full Text:

      Section 343 Deemed accumulated income.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax