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
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
    Doctrine of Reasonable Cause in Tax Penalties : Clause 470 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Voluntary Disclosure and Penalty Waiver under Indian Tax Law : Clause 469 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance with TDCAN/TAN Requirements : Clause 468 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 V...
    Penalty Provision for PAN/Aadhaar Non-Compliance in Indian Tax Law : Clause 467 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for deterrence against non-cooperation with tax authorities : Clause 466 of Incom...
    Procedural Defaults and Penalties in Indian Tax Law : Clause 465 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Se...
    Ensuring Compliance Among Tax-Exempt Entities : Clause 464 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section ...
    Professionals(i.e. Accountant, Marchant Banker, Registered Valuer) Accountability under Indian Incom...
    Enforcement of Information Disclosure in Cross-Border Transactions : Clause 462 of the Income Tax Bi...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-Filing and Incorrect Filing of TDS/TCS Statements : Clause 461 of the Inc...
    Enforcement of Reporting Obligations by a non-resident having liaison office : Clause 460 of Income ...
    Penalties for Reporting Non-Compliance by Resident constituent entity of an international group unde...
    Legal Implications of Non-Compliance with Reporting Requirements : Clause 458 of the Income Tax Bill...
    Strengthening Transfer Pricing Enforcement : Clause 457 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Section 271...
    Compliance and Penalty Mechanisms for Investment Funds under Indian Tax Law : Clause 456 of the Inco...
    Penalties for Inaccurate Financial Reporting under Indian Income Tax Law : Clause 455 of the Income ...
    Penalties for Non-Compliance in Financial Transaction Reporting : Clause 454 of the Income Tax Bill,...
    Penalty Provisions for Non-compliant Loan Repayments in India's Income Tax Law : Clause 453 of the I...
    Mandatory Electronic Payments and Penalty Regimes : Clause 452 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 Vs. Sect...
    Evolving Penalty Regimes for Monetary Transaction Violations : Clause 451 of the Income Tax Bill, 20...
❯❯
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
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reasonable cause defense protects taxpayers from penalties for bona fide, non culpable defaults and encourages documented compliance.
    Clause 470 creates an exception to specified penalty provisions: no penalty shall be imposed if the assessee proves there was reasonable cause for the failure. It functions as a non obstante provision covering enumerated sections, shifts the burden of proof to the taxpayer, and is aimed primarily at bona fide procedural or technical lapses rather than deliberate violations.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Voluntary disclosure and penalty waiver enable administrative relief when pre detection disclosure, cooperation and payment conditions are met.
    Clause 469 empowers the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner to reduce or waive penalties under section 439 where a taxpayer has made a full and true voluntary disclosure before detection, cooperated in assessment and paid or arranged payment of tax or interest; it includes a deeming rule for full disclosure, prior approval safeguards for high value cases, a bar on multiple reliefs, a genuine hardship route with recorded reasons, a twelve month disposal limit, opportunity to be heard, and finality of orders.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to quote TDCAN/TAN: discretionary fixed sanctions apply for non compliance and knowingly false quoting.
    Clause 468 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed monetary penalty for failure to comply with Section 397 and for quoting a false Tax Deduction and Collection Account Number in prescribed documents where the person knows or believes it to be false, making the penalty discretionary and imposing a mens rea requirement for false quoting while not expressly providing for a statutory opportunity of being heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    PAN/Aadhaar compliance: new per-default penalty regime distinguishes intentional false quoting from strict liability omissions and extends responsible person liability.
    Clause 467 establishes a per-default penalty regime for non-compliance with section 262, differentiating intentional false PAN/Aadhaar quoting-which requires proof of knowledge or belief-from omissions treated as strict liability, and extends liability to persons responsible for ensuring correct quoting/authentication; it emphasizes authentication and digital e KYC integration while remaining silent on express procedural safeguards such as the opportunity to be heard, creating potential due process and transitional issues.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non cooperation: new provision allows senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty without explicit hearing safeguards.
    Clause 466 empowers specified senior tax officers to impose a moderate monetary penalty for failure to comply with section 254, mirroring prior penalty structure in authority and capped quantum but omitting express procedural safeguards such as an opportunity of being heard, defences like reasonable cause, and a requirement to record reasons, thereby raising concerns about procedural fairness and consistency in imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for procedural defaults: fixed and daily fines, capped to tax collectible, with delegated authority to impose them.
    Clause 465 creates a penalty regime for procedural non compliance under the Income Tax Bill, 2025: a fixed penalty for discrete defaults, a daily penalty for continuing defaults, a cap tying certain penalties to the amount of tax deductible or collectible, and specified authorities empowered to impose penalties; it broadens the definition of income tax authority and updates cross references to the restructured Bill, while notably omitting an explicit provision requiring an opportunity to be heard before penalty imposition.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty regime for failure to furnish prescribed statements strengthens compliance under tax exempt reporting obligations.
    A statutory penalty regime targets failure by specified research institutions and charitable funds to furnish prescribed documents, statements, or certificates within prescribed timeframes; penalties fall within a prescribed band and are imposed at the discretion of the Assessing Officer, operating as a civil compliance measure alongside general procedural safeguards and requiring stakeholders to update compliance processes to align with re referenced substantive sections.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Professional accountability: penalty for furnishing incorrect information in professional reports or certificates under the new income tax bill.
    Clause 463 imposes a strict-liability penalty regime on accountants, merchant bankers and registered valuers for furnishing incorrect information in any report or certificate under the Act or rules. It prescribes a fixed per-instance monetary penalty and empowers the Assessing Officer, Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or Commissioner (Appeals) to impose the penalty upon satisfaction that incorrect information was furnished. The clause updates definitional references for valuers, omits an explicit definition of "accountant," and operates without prejudice to other civil or criminal consequences.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish information: fixed sanction for inaccurate or missing cross-border disclosure, raising proportionality concerns.
    Clause 462 penalises any person required to furnish information under section 397(3)(d) who fails to supply such information or furnishes inaccurate information; the Assessing Officer may impose a fixed monetary penalty, the provision mirrors Section 271I in structure and intent, lacks an express reasonable-cause defence or gradation of penalty, and raises interpretative issues as to the scope of "inaccurate information," procedural safeguards, and proportionality in enforcement.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: discretionary fines with short grace period where tax is paid and statement filed promptly.
    Clause 461 creates a penalty for failure to deliver statements under section 397(3)(b) or for furnishing incorrect information, authorising the Assessing Officer to impose a discretionary monetary penalty equivalent in range to the existing Section 271H. Clause 461(2) exempts penalty where tax, fee and interest are paid to the Central Government and the statement is filed within a short grace period, thereby balancing deterrence with relief for prompt substantive compliance while leaving procedural safeguards and definitions, such as "incorrect information," unclearly specified.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to submit statements may be imposed by the assessing officer as a daily or capped sanction, discretion preserved.
    Clause 460 permits the Assessing Officer to impose discretionary monetary penalties on any person required to furnish a statement under section 505 for failure to file within the prescribed period, using a two-tier structure of a daily sanction for short-term delay and a capped penalty for longer default, with applicability dependent on the scope of the parent reporting obligation and subject to the general procedural and appellate framework of the tax law.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Reporting penalties: new clause preserves escalating daily fines and a large fixed penalty for inaccurate international tax reports.
    Clause 459 establishes a tiered penalty regime under section 511 for reporting entities: daily penalties for failure to furnish reports, daily penalties for failure to produce information after the allowed period, an escalated daily penalty if default continues after service of a penalty order, and a substantial fixed penalty for furnishing inaccurate information or failing to correct known or discovered inaccuracies. The prescribed authority under section 511 is empowered to impose these penalties, and the clause mirrors Section 271GB in quantum and triggers while raising issues about reasonable cause relief and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to report transfers of management or control triggers significant compliance and enforcement consequences.
    Clause 458 creates a penalty for failure by an Indian concern to furnish information or documents under section 506, authorising the prescribed income-tax authority to impose either a transaction-value-based penalty where a transaction effects a direct or indirect transfer of management or control, or a fixed monetary penalty otherwise, and otherwise mirrors the substantive framework and enforcement objectives of Section 271GA of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Transfer pricing documentation penalty: failure to furnish documents leads to transaction value based penalties and enforcement by tax authorities.
    Failure to furnish prescribed transfer pricing information or documentation for international or specified domestic transactions triggers a transaction value based penalty under Clause 457, enforceable by the Assessing Officer, authorised Transfer Pricing Officer and the Commissioner (Appeals); the clause ties this enforcement directly to the obligations in section 171(2) and raises interpretive issues concerning the meaning of failure, computation of transaction value, overlap with other penalties, and the availability of a reasonable cause defence.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish statements: eligible investment funds face a fixed sanction under the bill; authority may impose it.
    Clause 456 imposes a fixed penalty where an eligible investment fund fails to furnish required statements or information within the prescribed time; the prescribed income-tax authority may direct payment of the fixed sanction. The reporting deadline is set by the substantive eligibility reporting provision; the penalty is discretionary rather than automatic, lacks a graded scale, and does not expressly specify procedural safeguards such as criteria for discretion or an opportunity to be heard.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for inaccurate financial reporting imposes institutional and account-holder liability while enabling recovery of penalties from account holders.
    Clause 455 mandates penalties for persons required to furnish statements of financial transactions or reportable accounts for providing inaccurate information or failing to meet due diligence obligations, and imposes an additional per-account penalty on reporting financial institutions where inaccuracies stem from account-holder-supplied false information; reporting institutions may recover such additional penalties from the responsible account holders by direct recovery or retention of funds, with imposition directed by the prescribed income-tax authority and substantive continuity with the former Section 271FAA.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for failure to furnish financial transaction statements - escalating daily sanctions for continued non-compliance after notice.
    Clause 454 creates a statutory penalty regime for failure to furnish a statement of financial transaction or reportable account, prescribing a daily penalty accruing from the date the filing deadline lapses, with an escalated daily rate where default continues after a formal notice, and vesting discretionary imposition authority in the income-tax authority subject to procedural safeguards and rights to challenge.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Penalty for non-compliant loan repayments: Assessing Officer may impose a penalty equal to the amount repaid for procedural breaches.
    Clause 453 permits the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to any loan, deposit or specified advance repaid in contravention of section 188, applying to all persons and covering repayments made by non-transparent modes. The provision creates strict liability based on procedural breach rather than mens rea, centralizes enforcement with the Assessing Officer, and omits an explicit reasonable-cause defence, raising potential interpretative and transitional issues regarding the scope of specified advances and procedural safeguards.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Electronic payment mandate triggers daily penalties for non compliance unless a taxpayer proves good and sufficient reason.
    Clause 452 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a fixed per day monetary penalty for failure to provide prescribed electronic modes of payment under section 187, subject to a saving where the person proves good and sufficient reason for the failure; the provision mirrors the former section 271DB framework but streamlines authority and lacks detailed procedural guidance.
    Act RulesBills
    Show AI Summary
    Monetary transaction penalty: discretion to impose a penalty equal to prohibited receipt unless good and sufficient reasons are proved.
    Clause 451 empowers the Assessing Officer to impose a penalty equal to the sum received in contravention of section 186 unless the recipient proves good and sufficient reasons; the provision emphasises proportionality, vests discretion in enforcement, omits explicit procedural safeguards and mens rea, and mirrors the substantive penalty quantum and defence in the earlier statutory regime while differing in statutory tone and procedural concision.

    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