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
    Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS to the Government
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Landmark Judgment on Tax Credit Entitlement - Credit of TDS if deductor failed to deposit the TDS ...
    A Case of Coerced Input Tax Credit Reversal - GST recovery during search and seizure proceedings.
    Manner of compliance of conditions of pre-deposit - Debit of amount from electronic credit ledger (E...
    The need for clarity and concrete reasons in the cancellation of GST registrations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of reopening of assessment - need for a direct link between the portal's information and th...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Application of provisions of section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 ...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Provisional release of imported goods (apples) - The dispute centers on the valuation of the import...
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Applicability of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of expenses - need for tax authorities to have a practical understanding of the nature ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Disallowance of the assessee's business expenditure claims related to the purchase of sugarcane from...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Additions made u/s 69 and Section 56 in the absence of direct incriminating evidence linking the ass...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Whether penalty is to be imposed when the appellant has accepted the classification and paid the ent...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Liability for payment of customs duty on sale of excess liquor from the duty-free shop
    Case LawsCustoms
    Demand of customs duty beyond normal period of limitation on the ground of change in classification ...
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Stringent approach towards ensuring compliance with auditing standards - importance of auditors' res...
    Whether the appellant's claim can be classified as a Financial Debt or Operational Debt under the In...
    Scope of Approval of resolution plan - Allegations of undervaluation of the Corporate Debtor's asset...
    Denial of Input Tax Credit since the GST registration of the Supplier of Goods has been Cancelled wi...
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a vested right or concession - Can government impose conditions or restric...
❯❯
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
    TDS credit entitlement affirmed: deductee entitled to credit despite deductor's non-deposit, preventing indirect recovery.
    Credit for tax deducted at source on interest payments is to be treated as tax paid on the deductee's behalf and does not depend on the deductor's remittance; statutory protections against indirect recovery prevent the revenue from seeking the same tax from the deductee when the deductor fails to deposit the deducted amount, and the deposit requirement in the applicable provisions does not negate the deductee's entitlement to such credit.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Tax credit for TDS: deductee entitled to credit even if deductor failed to deposit the retained tax with government.
    The Court treats amounts retained by a deductor as remaining tax and concludes the statutory credit mechanism for tax deducted at source does not condition a deductee's entitlement on the deductor having deposited the retained amount with the government, thereby barring indirect recovery or adjustment against the deductee where tax has been deducted at source.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Coercive tax collection prohibited; forced reversal of input tax credit during search deemed impermissible, with investigatory remedies preserved.
    Dispute involved a search under Section 67 and an alleged coerced reversal of Input Tax Credit from the petitioner's Electronic Credit Ledger for supplies from a supplier with retrospectively cancelled registration; the court found such coercive recovery during search impermissible and directed restoration of the ITC while preserving the department's power to investigate and, if ineligible or fraudulent ITC is found, pass appropriate protective orders.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Pre-deposit payment method: Electronic credit ledger debit does not satisfy pre-deposit; cash ledger payment required for appeals.
    Pre-deposit for appeals under the CGST/BGST regime must be paid from the cash ledger; debit from the electronic credit ledger does not satisfy the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A revenue circular restricting ECRL use to certain output tax payments and excluding reverse charge, interest, penalties, fees, and similar amounts supports that ECRL cannot be used for pre-deposit. The court emphasized the statutory payment scheme and strict appeal filing timelines, rejecting arguments that ECRL debit could substitute for cash ledger payment.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Requirement of clear reasons in GST cancellation: retrospective deregistration must be reasoned and consider input tax credit effects.
    Cancellation of GST registration must be supported by clear reasons and concrete factual findings in show cause notices and cancellation orders; labels that a registration is "liable to be cancelled" without specifying dues or factual basis constitute mechanical action. Retrospective cancellation cannot be applied routinely; authorities must follow statutory procedure, assess causes for non-filing, consider exceptional disruptions to business operations, and account for the impact on input tax credit before fixing an effective date of cancellation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Use of portal data: digital information needs a direct evidential link before reopening income tax assessments.
    Reopening assessments requires a direct evidential link between portal-derived information and the income alleged to have escaped assessment; portal data alone is insufficient without documentary support for transactions or gifts, and a show cause notice must provide adequate particulars and reflect proper consideration of the taxpayer's response before reassessment proceeds.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Non retrospective application of punitive benami provisions affirmed, limiting enforcement to post amendment transactions.
    Application of Section 5 of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 concerns whether punitive provisions enacted in 2016 apply to transactions predating the amendment. The Appellate Tribunal relied on Supreme Court precedent that such punitive provisions must be applied prospectively, and the High Court emphasized adherence to that interpretation while allowing parties to pursue further remedies pending the Supreme Court review.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Provisional release of perishable imports allowed pending valuation, subject to provisional assessment and bond to protect revenue interests.
    The dispute concerns provisional release of perishable imported apples amid a valuation contest tied to a stayed minimum import price notification. The instrument requires provisional assessment of the Bill of Entry within a brief timeframe and permits conditional provisional release upon the importer furnishing a bond and meeting terms set by customs, thereby reconciling the protection of revenue interests with the practical need to avoid loss to perishable consignments pending final resolution of the notification's applicability.
    Case LawsBenami Property
    Show AI Summary
    Prospective application of punitive benami amendment upheld, limiting reach to post-enactment transactions and preserving pre-enactment protections.
    The Madras High Court affirmed that the enhanced punitive provision introduced by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 is substantive and applies prospectively; it endorsed the Tribunal's reliance on the Supreme Court's Ganapati Dealcom decision, treated a pending Supreme Court review petition as not displacing that precedent, and disposed of the appeals while allowing further proceedings consistent with prospectivity and prior constitutional findings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Disallowance of expenses must rest on specific documentation defects, not on blanket percentage adjustments.
    Disallowance of business expenses on a summary or estimate basis requires specific, pointed deficiencies and cannot rest on generalized conclusions about excessiveness; in businesses with routine small transactions, tax authorities must examine the nature of operations and identify particular defects in documentation before applying blanket percentage disallowances.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Statutory Minimum Price interpretation: excess cane payments treated as appropriation of profits, not deductible business expense.
    The core issue is whether payments for sugarcane in excess of the Statutory Minimum Price (SMP) are deductible business expenditures or constitute an appropriation of profits. The Assessing Officer relied on standard accounting practice requiring provisions for liabilities at year end and treated post closing excess payments as distributions of operational surplus. The appellate view upheld that cooperative status does not alter the tax analysis and that payments beyond the SMP do not qualify as allowable business expenses absent proper provisioning within the accounting period.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Direct incriminating evidence requirement: third party search materials alone cannot sustain unexplained investment additions.
    Additions alleged as unexplained investments and undisclosed interest income based on third party search materials require a demonstrable direct nexus between those seized records and the assessee; absent such direct incriminating evidence, reliance on third party statements or documents is insufficient. Procedural safeguards and transactional indicia-such as cross examination opportunities, banking records, documentary support, and TDS-reduce the probative value of seized material when direct linkage is lacking.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty under Section 114A: no justification where importer accepted correct classification and paid differential duty before notice.
    Issue: imposition of a penalty for alleged suppression when the importer accepted correct tariff classification and paid the differential duty with interest before issuance of a show cause notice. The importer attributed the earlier misclassification to an agent error and denied intent to evade duty. The authority observed the accurate product description, admission of correct classification and prompt payment, concluded absence of suppression of facts and determined that the statutory penalty provision was not justified on these facts.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Liability under Section 72: duty rests with duty-free shop licence-holder when trade facility conditions are breached.
    Duty arises where a duty-free shop licence-holder breaches voucher and recordkeeping conditions under the trade facility; the licence-holder bears responsibility for payment of duty and interest when procedural requirements are violated, while penalty depends on culpability and may be disallowed where no intent to evade duty is established and customs were aware of the transactions.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Extended limitation in customs demands inapplicable where no suppression, limiting reassessment for CVD on undeclared MRP entries.
    Reassessment and CVD demand arose from a post-clearance change in classification and retrospective reliance on MRP for past entries; the tribunal held that items described were essential refrigeration parts rather than accessories, that MRP-based reassessment requires clear factual basis, and that the Extended Period of Limitation is inapplicable where no suppression is established, although penalty issues may still be considered where omissions occur.
    Case LawsCorporate Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Auditor responsibility reinforced: regulatory findings against audit failures stress strict adherence to auditing standards and sanctions.
    NFRA found a statutory auditor guilty of professional misconduct for failures to comply with Standards on Auditing, including inadequate procedures to verify revenue, lack of physical inventory verification, insufficient going concern assessment, deficient materiality application, and inadequate communication with Those Charged with Governance, and applied regulatory sanctions to reinforce auditor responsibilities in preserving financial reporting integrity.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Operational debt classification confirmed for supplier's claim based on the transaction's nature under the insolvency framework.
    Whether a claim from a supply arrangement is a Financial Debt or an Operational Debt depends on the transaction's substantive character. The tribunal examined contractual terms-penalties for non-delivery, interest, and security cheques-and applied precedents on the financial-versus-operational distinction. It characterised the supplier's claim, filed under Section 9, as arising from the supply of goods and therefore as an operational debt, sustaining the Resolution Professional's and Adjudicating Authority's classification.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Commercial wisdom of committee of creditors governs resolution plan approval, limiting valuation and standing challenges by promoters.
    Exclusion of the creditor was non irregular as no claim was filed; undervaluation allegations were rejected since opportunities to raise them during the CIRP were not used; the resolution plan satisfied Committee approval requirements and reflected the Committee's commercial wisdom; and a suspended director/promoter lacked standing to challenge the approved plan, underscoring limited judicial interference post approval.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input tax credit denial over supplier deregistration; remanded for document verification and fresh adjudication to determine genuineness.
    Denial of Input Tax Credit was challenged where the supplier's registration was retrospectively cancelled; the petitioner paid through bank and the supplier appeared on records at the time. The High Court remanded the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the appellate authority to reconsider the petitioner's documentary evidence, hold a hearing, and pass a reasoned order verifying genuineness and timing of transactions; if purchases are genuine and occurred prior to cancellation, ITC is to be considered per precedent.
    Act RulesGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit as legislative concession: entitlement subject to statutory conditions, but retrospective deprivation of vested accruals is vulnerable.
    Input Tax Credit (ITC) is a legislative concession, not a vested right, so the legislature may lawfully prescribe eligibility conditions and procedural limits which taxpayers must strictly satisfy; however, retrospective amendments that destroy or diminish an already accrued entitlement are susceptible to challenge and have been treated as impermissible when they impair rights that vested before the amendment.

    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