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 353 "Other violations." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      12 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 353 Other violations

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 353 (Income-tax Bill, 2025 - Old Version and Section 353, Income-tax Act, 2025) prescribes tax consequences for registered non-profit organisations that commit specified procedural or substantive violations. It identifies when regular income becomes taxable and prescribes the limited expenditure that may be deducted in computing taxable regular income. Affected parties: registered non-profit organisations and the revenue department. Effective date or decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: Clause/Section 353 operates in the field of the Income-tax legislation and cross-refers expressly to sections 334, 338, 346, 347, 348, 349 and 35(b)(i). Context: The provision addresses "other violations" by registered non-profit organisations and prescribes tax treatment where certain compliance failures or prohibited activities occur during a tax year. Coverage: registered non-profit organisations that (a) fail to maintain books u/s 347, (b) fail to get books audited u/s 348, (c) fail to furnish returns u/s 349, or (d) carry out a commercial activity in contravention of section 346 while carrying out advancement of other object(s) of general public utility. Definitions/explanations: The text does not supply separate definitions beyond its cross-references. Not stated in the document: any legislative history, purpose statement, or definition of terms like "commercial activity" beyond the cross-reference to section 346.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The core structure is as follows:

      • Sub-section (1) - Events: If during a tax year a registered non-profit organisation commits any of the listed failures or contravenes section 346 by carrying out a commercial activity while advancing other objects of general public utility, "its regular income for such tax year as reduced by the expenditure referred to in sub-section (3)" shall become taxable regular income chargeable u/s 334.
      • Sub-section (2) - Specified and residual income: Specified income and residual income of the registered non-profit organisation which are not included under sub-section (1) are also chargeable to tax u/s 334. The Bill states this is "in addition to" the tax under sub-section (1) and that section 338 does not apply; the Act states that the provision operates "irrespective of the provisions of section 338."
      • Sub-section (3) - Permitted expenditure: Sets out conditions under which expenditure is to be recognised in computing the reducible amount of regular income in sub-section (1). Conditions include (in one version) an express ban on capital expenditure and a list of disallowances (e.g., not from corpus, not from loans, depreciation claims limitations, not contributions to persons, payments contravening section 36 subsections, and allowance u/s 35(b)(i)).
      • Sub-section (4) (Act) - No other set off/deduction: The Act explicitly provides that no set off or deduction or allowance other than those in sub-section (3) shall be allowed.

      Interpretation

      The textual design shows a legislative intent to impose tax consequences on non-profits that either fail procedural compliance (books, audit, return) or cross statutory activity boundaries (commercial activity contravening section 346). The provision converts "regular income" into taxable regular income in such years, while permitting a narrow catalogue of expenditure to reduce the taxable amount. The separate treatment of specified and residual income indicates the statute intends to capture all income streams of a non-profit that fall outside permitted treatment, notwithstanding any special provisions in section 338.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      The statute creates limited exceptions in favour of the organisation in computing taxable regular income: only expenditure that satisfies the conditions listed in sub-section (3) is allowable. These include expenditure being incurred in India, for the objects of the organisation, not from the corpus as of the end of the preceding tax year, not out of loans or borrowings, with restrictions on depreciation claims and payments to persons in contravention of section 36(4)-(7), and allowance conditions u/s 35(b)(i). In the Bill the express statement "capital expenditure shall not be allowed" appears as a stand-alone clause; in the Act that exclusion is incorporated by the phrase "other than capital expenditure" in the opening of sub-section (3). Not stated in the document: any thresholds, procedures for proving eligibility, or remedial opportunities for the non-profit (e.g., opportunity to rectify defaults) beyond the textual conditions.

      Illustrations

      • Hypothetical 1: A registered non-profit fails to file its return for tax year X and has regular income of Rs. 10 lac. Under sub-section (1) the organisation's regular income, reduced only by qualifying expenditure per sub-section (3), becomes taxable regular income chargeable u/s 334. Not stated in the document: specific tax rate or computation mechanics u/s 334.
      • Hypothetical 2: A registered non-profit carries out a commercial activity contravening section 346 and earns income from that activity that is classified as specified income. If that specified income is not covered by sub-section (1), sub-section (2) renders it chargeable u/s 334 irrespective of section 338. Not stated in the document: how specified/residual incomes are to be apportioned for mixed activities.

      Interplay

      The text expressly interacts with sections 334 (chargeability of tax), 338 (excluded or special treatment), 346 (commercial activity limits), 347-349 (obligations on books/audit/return), 35(b)(i) (allowability of particular payments), and 36(4)-(7) (payments to persons). The Act's language emphasises that section 338 is to be disregarded for incomes captured under sub-section (2) (or "irrespective of" section 338), signalling an intention to prevent special protective mechanisms elsewhere from defeating taxation here. Not stated in the document: any rules, circulars, or clarifying guidance explaining application where multiple provisions overlap.

      Differences between the two provisions and practical impact

      • Placement of prohibition on capital expenditure and set-off: The Bill (Clause 353, Old Version) expressly lists "capital expenditure shall not be allowed" as clause (a) within the computation conditions in sub-section (3), and places the prohibition on set off/deduction as clause (j) within the same sub-section. The enacted Section 353 shifts wording: sub-section (3) begins by saying expenditure referred to in sub-section (1) shall be the expenditure incurred in India (other than capital expenditure) - thereby embedding the capital-expenditure exclusion in the main description - and moves the prohibition on set off/deduction/allowance to a separate sub-section (4).
        • Practical impact: Functionally the same restrictions appear to remain, but the Act's re-structuring separates the list of qualifying expenditure from the rule disallowing other set offs/deductions, which may affect statutory reading and drafting clarity.
      • Sub-section (2) wording and emphasis: The Bill states that "In addition to the tax referred to in sub-section (1), the specified income and residual income ... shall also be chargeable ... to the extent not covered ... and the provisions of section 338 shall not apply." The Act states: "Irrespective of the provisions of section 338, any the specified income and residual income ... which is not included in sub-section (1) shall also be chargeable ..."
        • Practical impact: Both aim to subject specified and residual incomes to tax in addition to sub-section (1) amounts and to neutralise section 338, but the Act's phrasing places a direct emphasis on disregarding section 338; the functional result appears substantially similar, though drafting differences could influence interpretive emphasis in disputes.
      • Minor drafting and typographical differences: The Act contains a minor typographical insertion ("any the specified income") and reorders certain clauses (e.g., clause reference to section 35(b)(i) remains but appears as (h) in the Act).
        • Practical impact: No substantive alteration of substantive conditions is evident from the text provided; differences are primarily structural and stylistic.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Registered non-profit organisations face direct tax exposure where they fail to maintain books, secure an audit, file returns, or engage in prohibited commercial activity. The provision narrows allowable deductions, increasing effective taxable base risk in non-compliance years.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The statute highlights the primacy of expenditure "incurred in India," "for the objects of the registered non-profit," and not from corpus or borrowings. Organisations should, therefore, maintain clear contemporaneous records proving the source of funds, purpose of expenditure, location of expenditure, and depreciation claims, though procedural requirements for proof are Not stated in the document.

      Key Takeaways

      • Section/Clause 353 targets both procedural failures (books, audit, returns) and substantive violation (commercial activity contrary to section 346) by registered non-profits and converts regular income into taxable regular income for the tax year of violation.
      • Specified and residual incomes not covered under the taxable regular income provision are also taxed u/s 334, and the provision disfavors the application of section 338.
      • The statute permits only a narrow class of expenditures to reduce taxable regular income; capital expenditure and certain categories of payments are excluded.
      • The Act restructured certain clauses from the Bill (notably repositioning the capital expenditure exclusion and the prohibition on other set offs/deductions), with no clear substantive relaxation or extension shown in the text provided.
      • Organisations must maintain documentation showing source and nature of expenditures, but specific procedural proofs or remedial mechanisms are Not stated in the document.

      Full Text:

      Section 353 Other violations

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax