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
    The Legal Contours of Input Tax Credit Eligibility: Procedural Aspects of GST and ITC
    Case LawsService Tax
    Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM): Service Tax Implications for Exporters: A Legal Perspective on Forei...
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Cheque Dishonour and Corporate Responsibility: Analyzing the Supreme Court's Latest Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Procedural Technicalities vs. Substantive Justice in Tax Administration: A High Court Perspective
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Revision u/s 263 and denial of deduction u/s 80IA: A Critical Analysis of the Delhi High Court's Jud...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Condonation of Delay and Jurisdictional Challenges: A Case Analysis of ITAT Kolkata's Decision
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis: Scrutiny of Share Capital and Premium Under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Judicial Scrutiny of Retrospective Cancellation of Charitable Trust Registration: A Case Analysis of...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Office and Prosecution under Income Tax Act: Jurisdiction of Trial Court - Decision in a High Profil...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxation of Unexplained Income at Higher Rate of tax u/s 115BBE : A Comprehensive Analysis of the IT...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Analysis of ITAT Mumbai Judgment - Transfer Pricing Adjustment Dispute: Period of limitation u/s 144...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    In-Depth Analysis of Key Issues in the ITAT Chennai Judgement
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Doctrine of Merger in Income Tax Assessment: An Analysis of ITAT Chennai's Recent Judgment
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Delay in refund processing, the petitioner's entitlement to interest, and the court's decision to gr...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Rejection of revision application u/s 264 in favor of assessee: A beneficial provision of Income Tax...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    An Analysis of ITAT Decision on International Taxation, Capital Gains, and DTAA
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Taxability of CSR fund: Treatment of certain funds received by an entity, particularly focusing on w...
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Legal Analysis of ESOP Deduction and allowability in the Revised Return of income: An ITAT decision.
❯❯
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 LawsGST
    Show AI Summary
    Input Tax Credit eligibility: procedural limits on reversing claims without supplier inquiry and GSTR-2A non-reflection not dispositive.
    Section 16(2) sets the statutory conditions for Input Tax Credit-tax invoice, receipt, tax payment, and return filing-and GSTR-2A serves only as a facilitator; non-reflection there does not automatically negate eligibility. Tax authorities must inquire into supplier conduct and observe procedural safeguards before reversing ITC or recovering tax from the recipient, with judicial precedents and CBIC clarifications shaping when exceptions may apply.
    Case LawsService Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Reverse charge mechanism: exporter not liable for foreign bank charges when Indian bank is the direct service recipient.
    The core issue is whether an exporter is liable under the Reverse Charge Mechanism for foreign bank charges deducted from export proceeds when those charges are imposed on and paid by an Indian intermediary bank. The Tribunal's analysis focuses on the definition of service recipient and territorial scope, concluding that the direct recipient-the Indian bank-is the party liable to discharge service tax while the exporter, as an indirect beneficiary without direct dealings with the foreign bank, is not subject to reverse charge.
    Case LawsIndian Laws
    Show AI Summary
    Directorial liability: strict averment requirement prevents presuming directors' responsibility without specific allegation, leading to quashing.
    The Court held that directorial liability requires specific averment that the director was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business at the time of the offence; mere titular position or awareness of cheque issuance is insufficient. It emphasized the necessity of serving the statutory notice prerequisite and rejected liberal construction to cure absent statutory averments, quashing proceedings against directors for non-compliance.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    DIN requirement in tax administration: absence of mandatory DIN can invalidate assessment orders unless exceptional circumstances apply.
    Failure to quote the mandatory computer-generated Document Identification Number (DIN) in assessment orders, as required by the CBDT Circular from 1 October 2019, constitutes a procedural defect that can render the order invalid unless the revenue demonstrates that the issuance fell within the Circular's narrowly drawn exceptional circumstances; the Tribunal found such non-compliance in the order dated 15 October 2019 and the High Court affirmed, while the Supreme Court granted interim stay for further consideration.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Capitation fee allegations challenge admissibility and attribution of seized evidence in charitable trust tax exemption inquiries.
    Alleged collection of capitation fees by a registered charitable trust threatens its exemption under Section 11; most evidence was seized from employees' residences, invoking the presumption under Section 132(4A) and raising attribution issues. Employee admissions later retracted, similar statement drafting, declarations under the Income Declaration Scheme 2016, and trustees' acknowledgments create contradictory evidentiary threads that complicate admissibility, credibility, and whether the seized funds can be treated as trust income.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Condonation of delay in tax compliance: liberal interpretation protects bona fide taxpayers from technical disqualification.
    The court analysed whether delay in filing Form 10 could be condoned, considering the petitioner's unawareness of post 2016 amendments, CBDT circulars and precedent, and applying principles that each case be judged on its facts; it stressed that failure to claim accumulation does not by itself show absence of intent to comply and urged a liberal approach to mitigate genuine hardship and prevent procedural technicalities from defeating substantive justice.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Section 263 limited to substantial legal errors; mere differences of opinion don't justify revisional tax action.
    Scope of Section 263 is confined to instances where an assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to revenue in a substantial way, not mere differences of opinion. Migration of licences from IP VPN to NLD ILD does not, by itself, create a new undertaking defeating entitlement to deduction under Section 80IA(4)(ii), particularly where identical deductions were previously allowed; administrative migration requires clear proof of substantive change before re characterising eligibility.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Delay condonation based on sufficient cause upheld where illness, relocation and pandemic disruption justified late filing and jurisdictional challenge.
    The tribunal applied a purposive construction of sufficient cause to condone substantial delay where cumulative factors-serious illness, change of residence and pandemic disruption-made filing untimely. It also found the assessment infirm for want of territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction because the taxpayer had established residence and filing history in a different territorial unit and administrative guidance allocated jurisdiction accordingly, underscoring that proper vesting of authority is a condition precedent to valid assessment.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Unexplained cash credits under Section 68 require taxpayers to prove investor identity and genuineness; authorities must rebut with evidence.
    Applicability of Section 68 requires the assessee to establish investor identity, creditworthiness and transaction genuineness-via PAN, tax returns, audited accounts and bank statements-and once this initial burden is satisfied, the burden shifts to the revenue to rebut with concrete evidence; mere suspicion or inability to trace an ultimate source does not alone justify additions if investments are reasonable relative to investors' net worth and effected through banking channels.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Retrospective cancellation of charitable trust registration invalidated due to lack of competent jurisdiction and procedural non compliance.
    The Tribunal invalidated the cancellation of a charitable trust's registration because the regional authority lacked competence to cancel under the statutory scheme and the transfer used to reassign the matter was improper; it further held that applying the newer cancellation provision retrospectively to deprive the trust of its recognized status was not legally tenable, emphasizing required notice, hearing and adherence to principled statutory interpretation.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Jurisdiction in multi locational offences governs venue determination; magistrate discretion and supervisory thresholds shape tax prosecution forums under criminal procedure.
    The judgment analyses Cr.P.C. place of offence principles in multi locational tax prosecutions, assessing whether procedural acts like recording statements under the Income Tax Act determine venue. It evaluates the magistrate's discretion in taking cognizance where alleged offences span jurisdictions and outlines the threshold for superior court supervisory intervention, emphasising that extraordinary petitions require demonstration of abuse of process or exceptional circumstances before altering magistrate venue determinations.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Taxation of unexplained income: higher-rate treatment applies, and deductions including partner salary are disallowed.
    The tribunal held that excess unrecorded stock and cash found on survey were assessable as unexplained investment and unexplained money, and that the special higher-rate taxation provision applies to such income, taxing it at a higher fixed rate and disallowing any deduction; consequently the claimed partner's salary relating to the unexplained investment was disallowed.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Limitation under section 144C: assessment issued beyond statutory period, leaving transfer pricing adjustment unresolved on procedural grounds.
    The tribunal focused on the statutory time limit under Section 144C(13) for passing assessment orders after DRP directions, treated the order as barred by limitation and therefore did not adjudicate substantive transfer pricing challenges raised under Section 92CA. Consequently, technical disputes over comparability, exclusion/inclusion of comparables, and the profit level indicator computation were left unexamined.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Capitalization of interest: tribunal scrutinised whether interest and forex on capital projects form capital cost or permit revenue deduction.
    The tribunal analyzed four core taxation questions: whether interest and foreign exchange fluctuations written off from Capital Work in Progress are capital or revenue in nature and their nexus to business operations; whether write off of a DG set component should be treated within the block of assets for depreciation or as a revenue repair; the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) to proportionate interest on interest free advances to related concerns and the presumption from mixed funds; and the evidentiary requirements to establish that inter corporate deposits were funded from own funds rather than borrowed monies for interest deduction purposes.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Doctrine of merger limits revisional jurisdiction under appeals, preventing collateral review of identical legal issues.
    The Doctrine of Merger operates to treat legal issues from an assessment as merged into appeal proceedings before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), thereby constraining subsequent revisional jurisdiction over those same issues; applied where initial assessment, reassessment notices and search-related assessment steps overlap, and supported by judicial precedent limiting collateral revision.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Interest on delayed tax refunds where delay is not attributable to the taxpayer under Section 244A.
    Entitlement to interest under Section 244A arises when refund payment is delayed for reasons not attributable to the assessee. The petitioner, a foreign company, faced delays caused by technical issues and incorrect guidance regarding banking details; the court treated the delay as the respondents' responsibility and applied Section 244A to award interest for the period of delay, directing payment according to the statutory rate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Revision application under Section 264: remand for fresh merits review when alternative remedies were improperly relied upon.
    Whether a revision under Section 264 may be denied solely because alternative remedies existed and whether appeal provisions applied to DDT-related treaty claims; the court found that rejecting revision on the mere availability of other remedies was untenable and that the appealed provision was inapplicable, directing fresh merits consideration of treaty relief and related tax computation by the Principal Commissioner.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    DTAA interpretation clarifies capital gains tax treatment for cross-border share sales under residency and grandfathering conditions.
    Taxation of capital gains from a Mauritius-based entity's sale of Indian company shares is analysed against the India-Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, focusing on DTAA allocation of taxing rights, timing of acquisition and transfer, and applicability of grandfathering provisions. The Tribunal assessed tax residency and treaty entitlement by examining corporate structure and commercial substance, applying the substance over form principle to determine whether treaty benefits were appropriate.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    Fiduciary funds not treated as taxable income when entity acts as facilitator; earmarked project funds excluded from income.
    The Tribunal examined whether earmarked receipts should be included in taxable income or treated on the balance sheet, focusing on jurisdictional validity of scrutiny notices, whether amounts were routed through the income and expenditure account or retained as earmarked funds, and whether receipts held in a fiduciary capacity for disaster relief were excluded from the entity's income because the entity acted only as facilitator without beneficial ownership.
    Case LawsIncome Tax
    Show AI Summary
    ESOP deduction in revised returns - tribunal permits claim within revision window, stressing valuation, timing and documentary consistency.
    Deductibility of ESOP-related costs in a revised return hinges on compliance with the statutory time limit for revision and on accounting and evidentiary consistency: correct year of recognition, reliable grant date valuation (e.g., Black Scholes), concordant employee records, and disclosure in audited accounts. The tribunal found the claim allowable within the revision window but emphasised documentary proof, valuation method and timing of liability as central to acceptability.

    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 394 "Collection of tax at source." between the Income-Tax Act, 2025 (as passed) and the Income-Tax Bill, 2025 (as originally introduced)

      15 September, 2025

      Contents
      Acts
      Rules & Regulations
      Summary
      Note

      Note

      -

      Bookmark

      Print

      Print

      Section 394 Collection of tax at source.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      Clause 394 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 sets out a statutory regime for collection of tax at source (TCS) on specified receipts by specified persons at prescribed rates. It identifies nine categories of receipts (sale of specified goods, certain remittances, overseas tour packages, use of parking/toll/mines) and prescribes collection obligations, exemptions on presentation of declarations, and limited interplay with other tax deduction obligations. The provision affects sellers, authorised dealers, licensors/lessors and buyers; effective/decision date: Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hook: Clause 394 (Deduction and collection at source) in the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The clause establishes a TCS framework: persons specified in column C of an accompanying Table are obligated to collect tax on receipts in column B at rates in column D and at the time specified in clause (1)(c). The Table enumerates nine receipt types, identifies the collector (seller, authorised dealer, licensor/lessor) and prescribes TCS rates. Definitions: "forest produce" is to have the same meaning as in any State Act for the time being in force or in the Indian Forest Act, 1927. The text includes procedural exemptions and limited interplays with other liabilities to deduct tax at source elsewhere in the Bill. The Bill version provides the operative words of the regime but omits certain implementation details and administrative timelines now present in the enacted text.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      Clause 394(1) establishes three elements of the collection obligation: (a) the receipts on which TCS is to be collected (Table, column B); (b) the rate of collection (Table, column D); and (c) the timing - "at the time of debiting of the amount payable ... to the account of the buyer ... or at the time of receipt of such amount ... in cash or by way of a cheque of a draft or any other mode, whichever is earlier." The Table enumerates nine categories, including sale of alcoholic liquor for human consumption (1%), tendu leaves (5%), timber and other forest produce (2%), scrap (1%), specified minerals (1%), sale consideration exceeding Rs.10,00,000 for motor vehicles or other notified goods (1%), LRS remittances exceeding Rs.10,00,000 (5% for education/medical; 20% for other), overseas tour packages (5% up to Rs.10,00,000; 20% above), and use of parking/toll/mines/quarry (2%). Clause 394(6) prescribes the statutory meaning of "forest produce" by reference to state law or the Indian Forest Act, 1927.

      Interpretation

      The Bill frames TCS as a duty of the person effecting the receipt (seller, authorised dealer, licensor/lessor), with timing tied to debiting to account or actual receipt - a cash/book nexus that aims to align collection with actual cashflow or accounting recognition. The specified rates signal policy choices: low rates (1-2%) on certain commodities, higher rates (5%/20%) on cross-border remittances and tourism packages to operate as deterrents or pre-emptive collection mechanisms for potential tax leakage. The cross-reference to state definitions for "forest produce" indicates legislative intent to harmonise with existing local regimes rather than introduce a uniform federal definition.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      Clause 394(2) exempts collection for buyers who are Indian residents when they furnish a written declaration in duplicate in a prescribed form and manner, stating that the goods are to be utilised for manufacturing/processing/generating power and not for trading purposes. Clause 394(3) requires the collector to deliver one copy of the declaration to the Principal Chief Commissioner/Chief Commissioner/Principal Commissioner/Commissioner "on or before the seventh day of the month following the month of receipt of that declaration" in the enacted text; the Bill version simply requires delivery of one copy (the Bill does not state the exact timetable). Clause 394(4) (Bill) excludes collection by the authorised dealer on amounts for which tax has already been collected by the seller (serial 8). Clause 394(5) excludes collection in cases where the buyer is liable to deduct tax under other provisions and has done so. Clause 394(6) supplies the definition of "forest produce."

      Illustrations

      • Example 1: A seller sells scrap to a resident buyer for Rs.200,000 and debits the buyer's ledger the same day. Under Clause 394(1), seller must collect 1% TCS at the time of debiting/receipt. If the buyer furnishes the prescribed declaration (utilisation for manufacturing and not trading), the collector need not collect TCS (Clause 394(2)).
      • Example 2: An individual remits Rs.1,500,000 under LRS for non-medical/non-educational purposes. The authorised dealer must collect 20% TCS on the remitted amount exceeding Rs.10,00,000 (Clause 394, serial 7(b)). If tax has already been collected by a seller under serial 8 on a related amount, appropriate non-duplication applies (Clause 394(4) in Bill limited to that interaction).
      • Example 3: A licensor receives Rs.500,000 for permitting use of a private parking lot. Clause 394 (serial 9) prescribes 2% TCS collected by the licensor/lessor at time of debiting/receipt.

      Interplay

      Clause 394 interacts with other TDS/TCS provisions of the Bill (not reproduced in the document). Clause 394(5) expressly disapplies collection where the buyer is already liable to deduct tax under other provisions and has done so - a non-cumulation rule. The Bill's reference to "any other provisions of this Act" implies coordination across the deduction-and-collection regime but does not list the specific provisions. The Bill leaves administrative details (forms, manner, prescribed formats and verification) to subordinate rulemaking ("as prescribed"), which will govern practical compliance.

      Differences between Section 394 of the Income-tax Act, 2025 and Clause 394 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 - (Old Version) 

      • Drafting corrections and wording: The Bill (old version) in sub-clause (1)(c) reads "by way of a cheque of a draft" (typographical error). The enacted Section 394 corrects this to "by way of a cheque or a draft or any other mode".
        • Practical impact: clarification removes ambiguity about acceptable modes of receipt; no substantive tax consequence but reduces litigation risk from drafting ambiguity.
      • Sub-section (2) - scope and framing: The enacted Section 394 introduces the prefatory phrase "Irrespective of anything contained in sub-section (1) (Table: Sl. Nos. 1 to 5)," before describing the exemption on presentation of a declaration; the Bill omits that prefatory phrase.
        • Practical impact: the enacted phrasing emphasizes that the exemption operates notwithstanding the collection obligation in sub-section (1), reinforcing that the declaration displaces the collection duty for the specified buyers; the Bill's omission leaves the relationship implicit and could have been relied upon for a narrower reading.
      • Declaration procedure and delivery obligation (sub-section (3)): The Bill requires the person responsible to "deliver, one copy of the declaration" to the tax commissioner. The enacted Section 394 requires the person to "deliver or cause to be delivered, one copy of the declaration ... on or before the seventh day of the month following the month of receipt of that declaration."
        • Practical impact: enacted language adds a compliance timeline (7th day) and a causation clause ("or cause to be delivered") broadening responsibility where a third party may effect delivery; increased procedural clarity and a strict timeline for administrative receipt by the tax authority.
      • Exception for remittances under LRS and loans for education (sub-section (4)): The Bill's sub-section (4) is limited to excluding collection "on such amount on which tax has been collected by the seller referred to in serial number 8." The enacted provision expands sub-section (4) to add a second clause: (b) exclusion where the remitted amount is a loan obtained from any financial institution as defined in section 129(3)(b) for the purpose of pursuing any education.
        • Practical impact: enactment introduces an additional exemption for LRS remittances funded by education loans from defined financial institutions, reducing tax collection at source burden for such remittances and creating an additional compliance and verification requirement for authorised dealers.
      • Sub-section numbering/footnote and cross-reference language: The Bill's sub-section (6) references "For the purposes of this sub-section, 'forest produce'..." The enacted statute references "For the purposes of this section, 'forest produce'..." and includes a corrigendum note.
        • Practical impact: enacted change clarifies intended scope of the definition provision to the whole section rather than a single sub-section; corrigendum indicates a correction post enactment, reducing interpretive uncertainty regarding where the defined term applies.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Collectors (sellers, authorised dealers, licensors/lessors) must identify when receipts fall within the Table, determine the correct rate, and collect at the time of debiting or receipt. Risk areas include misclassification of receipts (e.g., whether a receipt is for "sale of minerals" versus other services), failure to obtain or preserve prescribed declarations, and duplicate collection where overlapping entries (serial 7 and 8) may apply.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: Collectors should maintain copies of declarations (one copy to be delivered to tax authorities per Bill), evidence of debiting/receipt dates, and documentation to show exemption conditions (e.g., buyer's declaration of end-use). Payment records and ledger entries will be critical to demonstrate correct timing and rate application. Where cross-collection rules apply (serial 7 vs 8), proof of prior collection by the seller will be material to avoid collection by the authorised dealer.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 394 prescribes TCS on nine specified receipts, allocating collection obligations to sellers, authorised dealers or licensors/lessors at fixed rates.
      • Timing of collection is anchored to debiting the buyer's account or actual receipt - creating a clear cash/book nexus for collection events.
      • Buyers who are Indian residents can avoid collection on certain goods by furnishing a prescribed declaration of end-use (manufacturing/processing/generating power and not trading).
      • Clause 394 attempts to prevent double collection by excluding authorised dealer collection where the seller has collected on related receipts; it also disapplies collection where the buyer has deducted tax under other provisions.
      • The Bill provides limited definitional guidance (forest produce) and leaves procedural prescriptions (forms, manner) to rules/regulations ("as prescribed").
      • Practical compliance will require robust documentation of debits/receipts, declarations, and coordination where multiple collection/deduction provisions could apply.
      • Specific administrative timelines and an additional exemption (education loan LRS remittances) appear in the enacted text but are absent or less developed in the Bill-version, underscoring the importance of reading the enacted section and corrigenda.

      Full Text:

      Section 394 Collection of tax at source.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax