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
    Reassessing Accommodation Entries: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    A Judicial Perspective on Section 148A of the Income Tax Act: Amended Reassessment Provisions
    Case LawsCustoms
    Analyzing Legal Principles in a Gold Smuggling Case: The Role of Co-accused Statements and Procedura...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Threshold set for monetary limits in filing appeals by Revenue: A policy shift towards reducing liti...
    Case LawsCustoms
    Navigating the Legal Consequences of Goods Misdeclaration in Customs Law
    Upholding Procedural Justice in GST Administration: Adjudication of GST demand u/s 74
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    High Court's Stance on Penalty Notices in Tax Law: A Balance Between Procedure and Justice
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decoding the Penalty Provisions under Section 271(1)(c): Analyzing the Fine Line Between Concealment...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Levy of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act: Between Legal Intent and Factual Circ...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    An Analysis of the Natural Justice Principle in Tender Cancellation: A Case Study
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Principles of Natural Justice and Administrative Action: Balancing Municipal Powers and Citizen Righ...
    Navigating Disclosure and Fair Trial in FEMA Proceedings: A Supreme Court Analysis
    Case LawsCustoms
    Legal Issues in Customs Duty Evasion: Penalties
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Assessing Penalties for non-filing of ITR: A Deep Dive into Section 271F of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Addition after survey option as Unaccounted income: Burden to prove and evidence.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Decision on Depreciation and Expenditure
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Through Reimbursement Expenses, DDT Refunds, and Transfer Pricing Adjustments
    A Judicial Perspective on Locus Standi in Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Cases
    Navigating Shareholder Rights in Corporate Insolvency: An Analysis of NCLAT’s Decision on the issu...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Navigating Financial Distress: A Legal Analysis of Progressive Tax Instalment Judgments
❯❯
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
    Reassessment under Section 148A: disputed factual issues on accommodation entries directed to the assessing officer for factual determination.
    The High Court required detailed scrutiny of alleged accommodation entries and the genuineness of share transactions under the reassessment procedure, noting taxpayers' disclosure of income as Short Term Capital Gains. Applying precedents on judicial review, the court held that disputed factual questions and the procedural validity of reassessment are to be determined by the Assessing Officer rather than in writ proceedings, absent evidence of arbitrariness or limitation breach.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 148A preliminary enquiry limits inquiry to existence of information before reassessment and preserves assessee procedural rights.
    Preliminary enquiries under the post amendment reassessment procedure require the assessing officer to possess tangible information suggesting escaped income and to afford the assessee an opportunity to respond before issuing a reassessment notice; the officer's inquiry at this stage is limited to ascertaining existence of such information and does not adjudicate the merits, while procedural protections-objection, access to information, and appellate remedies-remain available.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Co accused statements: cannot alone ground smuggling conviction; requires corroboration and procedural compliance to protect presumption of innocence.
    A solitary declaration by a co accused is insufficient to establish participation in a smuggling offence without independent corroborative evidence linking the accused to the seized goods or operation; reliance on such statements without examination and opportunity for cross examination undermines their evidentiary value and contravenes fair trial protections and the presumption of innocence.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary limits for appeals reshape Revenue litigation strategy, reducing low stake appeals and encouraging selective prosecution.
    The court treated CBDT instructions on monetary limits as possessing binding effect within the statutory appeals framework, harmonising the right to appeal with monetary limit provisions and applying policy considerations from the National Litigation Policy to limit low stake Revenue appeals; this approach affects Revenue litigation strategy, judicial resource allocation, taxpayer relief, and invites possible legislative clarification regarding retrospective or prospective application.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Misdeclaration of goods: deliberate misstatements attract differential duty, redemption fines and potential confiscation under customs law.
    Misdeclaration of goods in declared quantity and weight violates the statutory declaration regime; an accurate declaration is essential to duty assessment, and material, deliberate discrepancies justify imposition of differential duty, redemption fines and potential confiscation to protect revenue and deter evasion.
    Case LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Procedural fairness in GST notices: ensure intimation precedes show cause notice and allow reasonable opportunity to reply.
    The case addresses non-compliance with GST notice procedures where intimation in Form GST DRC-01A and a show cause notice under Section 74(1) were issued simultaneously, depriving the taxpayer of a statutory opportunity to reply. Emphasising procedural fairness and the right to a fair hearing, the court required that the taxpayer be allowed to file a response within a specified timeframe and that further proceedings, including any fresh notice, follow after consideration of that reply.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty notice specificity: lack of clarity requires proof of actual prejudice before challenging tax penalties.
    Penalty notices under Section 271(1)(c) read with Section 274 must clearly communicate the specific charge to secure a fair hearing; failure to object during proceedings may constitute acquiescence. Procedural defects do not invalidate penalty proceedings unless the affected party proves actual prejudice, and the burden of demonstrating such prejudice lies with the party alleging breach of natural justice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Furnishing inaccurate particulars cannot be presumed from mere disallowance; defective notices and bona fide claims constrain penalties.
    Penalty for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income requires proof of knowingly misstated or concealed particulars; mere disallowance of a claim does not suffice. A bona fide, arguable claim should not automatically attract penalty, and a defective or unadapted notice that fails to demonstrate application of mind can vitiate penalty proceedings.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Furnishing inaccurate particulars: claiming non existent depreciation can attract penalty even without willful concealment; notice must be specific.
    Claiming depreciation on non existent assets constitutes furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under the penalty provision; proof of willful concealment is not a necessary ingredient for civil penalty liability. Notices initiating penalty proceedings must be specific and clear to meet natural justice requirements, and factual admissions and reversal of disputed claims are operative in determining whether inaccurate particulars were furnished.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice in tender cancellations: ensure opportunity to be heard; flexibility applies where no actual prejudice arises.
    Natural justice in tender cancellation requires affected parties be given an opportunity to meet allegations; the case highlights an e tender interrupted by an ex parte inquiry, cancellation without prior notice, and allegations of bias. These procedural deficiencies implicate the audi alteram partem principle and render such cancellations arbitrary where parties are not afforded a fair chance to respond. The analysis notes natural justice is flexible and, in absence of actual prejudice, its breach may not invalidate administrative action, while stressing transparency and balanced procedural fairness by public bodies.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Natural justice requires municipal demolition actions to provide adequate notice and a fair hearing before affecting property rights.
    The judgment requires municipal enforcement actions affecting immovable property to rest on clear statutory authority and to respect constitutional property rights, insisting that dispossession or demolition follow lawful procedure. It mandates observance of natural justice, specifically adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard, and embeds these procedural safeguards within principles of transparency, proportionality, and reasoned municipal decision making.
    Case LawsFEMA
    Show AI Summary
    Disclosure obligations ensure accused access to relevant evidence, preserving fair trial rights in FEMA proceedings.
    Disclosure obligations under the Foreign Exchange Management Act require enforcement authorities to furnish accused persons with all relevant documents and evidence to enable preparation of defence, reflecting the right to a fair hearing and natural justice. Investigative confidentiality may justify limited nondisclosure only when authorities demonstrate specific harm, and any withholding must be narrowly tailored, with reasoned determinations that preserve core procedural fairness in FEMA adjudications.
    Case LawsCustoms
    Show AI Summary
    Customs Penalty Jurisdiction affirmed where under invoicing and dual invoicing indicate participation in duty evasion scheme.
    Imposition of penalties under Section 112(a) for alleged under invoicing and dual invoicing was sustained on the basis that receipt of part consideration and issuance of false invoices constituted participation in a scheme to evade customs duty; the offences were treated as occurring within India so the Customs Act applied, co noticee settlements did not extend immunity to others, and a jurisdictional challenge to DRI authority was found inapplicable to the notice issued.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Failure to file return on time triggers penalty under Section 271F even if return is later filed after reassessment notice.
    The summary addresses penalty liability for failing to file the original income tax return by the statutory due date, noting that later filing in response to a reassessment notice does not excuse the late original filing. It emphasizes that initiation of penalty proceedings after completion of reassessment does not automatically vitiate the penalty, and that absence of a valid reason for delay sustains penal consequences under the provision for non-filing.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Burden to prove unaccounted income: additions require admissible evidence, not assumptions from survey reports.
    Burden to prove alleged unaccounted income lies with the revenue; additions based on survey findings and an Inspector's report to re fix sale prices must be supported by admissible evidence. The taxpayer used the percentage of completion method for construction income, and impounded documents from a statutory survey were central to the dispute. Additions founded mainly on assumptions or inspector notes, without corroborative proof linking seized material to unexplained receipts, are susceptible to appellate review.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Depreciation on aircraft recognized when operational preparations precede airworthiness certificate, affecting tax depreciation timing.
    The tribunal treated preparatory expenditures to make a newly acquired aircraft operational as integral to business activity for determining the timing of depreciation, remitted the classification and amortisation of engine improvement and overhaul costs to the assessing officer, allowed component replacement and repair costs as revenue deductions because they did not extend useful life, and confirmed that interest on TDS is not an allowable deduction.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing adjustments shape ALP analysis and documentation requirements for royalties and management fees.
    Dispute involves deductibility of cross border reimbursement payments under Section 37 and whether assessing authorities recorded specific factual findings and afforded fair opportunity before disallowance. Related issues include entitlement to refund of excess Dividend Distribution Tax under the DTAA and the correct application of the Arm's Length Principle-notably choice between TNMM and CUP-for benchmarking royalty and management fees, with emphasis on documentation and comparability analysis.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Locus standi in insolvency proceedings: standing requires a direct, legitimate interest to initiate or challenge IBC processes.
    The commentary examines locus standi under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, focusing on entitlement to initiate, challenge and participate in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. It highlights procedural interactions among the financial creditor, resolution professional and Committee of Creditors, and discusses contested applications for extension of plan implementation, protection of bank guarantees and permission for fresh bids where a bidder failed to perform. The piece stresses that standing depends on a direct, legitimate interest and that courts apply a stringent interest based test when admitting challenges or procedural relief in IBC proceedings.
    Case LawsIBC
    Show AI Summary
    Shareholder locus standi constrained in insolvency; CoC commercial wisdom insulated from judicial interference absent material illegality.
    Shareholder rights are substantially curtailed after commencement of CIRP: shareholders may file claims in liquidation but lack standing to overturn CoC commercial decisions. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors is entitled to deference and is reviewable by courts only for material irregularity or legal violation; procedural objections and requests for forensic audit must demonstrate such material illegality to unsettle an approved resolution plan under the IBC.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Instalment payments: courts permit flexible tax instalment schedules for financially distressed corporates while respecting lower court discretion.
    The courts endorsed a flexible instalment framework permitting extension and adjustment of tax payment schedules when a corporate taxpayer demonstrates reduced capacity to pay, including temporary reduction of individual instalments with deficits spread over remaining payments. The appellate decision upheld the lower court's discretion, emphasising deference absent clear error and supporting reasonableness and proportionality in accommodating financial distress while preserving eventual recovery of assessed liabilities.

    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