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 395 "Certificates." 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 395 Certificates.

      Income-tax Act, 2025

      At a Glance

      The Document under commentary is Clause 395 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version) titled "Certificates." It sets out procedures for applications to the Assessing Officer for certificates permitting lower deduction or collection of tax at source, and for issuance of certificates evidencing deduction/collection. It matters to payees, payors, buyers/licensees/lessees, employers and non-residents; the effective date or enactment timing is Not stated in the document.

      Background & Scope

      Statutory hooks: the provision is part of the Chapter dealing with "Deduction and collection at source" in the Income Tax Bill, 2025. The clause provides a statutory mechanism for obtaining certificates from the Assessing Officer that alter the rate or quantum at which tax is deducted or collected at source. The clause contains five sub-sections that address (1) payee applications for lower deduction, (2) special procedure for payments to non-residents (proportionate determination), (3) applications by buyers/licensees/lessees for lower collection, (4) mandatory issuance of certificates by deductors/collectors (and employer-specific certificate requirements), and (5) cancellation of AO-issued certificates. Definitions of terms used in the clause (for example, "Assessing Officer", "payee", "person responsible for paying") are Not stated in the document.

      Statutory Provision Mode

      Text & Scope

      The clause applies where tax is required to be deducted or collected under the Chapter. Key ingredients: (i) an eligible applicant (payee; buyer/licensee/lessee; person responsible for paying to a non-resident) may apply to the Assessing Officer; (ii) the application must be made "in such form and manner as prescribed"; (iii) the Assessing Officer must be "satisfied" about the applicant's total income justifying a lower deduction/collection (or in the case of the Bill, a "lower deduction" / "lower collection"); (iv) the AO may issue a certificate specifying the rate at which tax shall be deducted/collected "till its validity"; (v) for certain payments to non-residents (other than salary), the payer may seek a determination of the proportion of the sum chargeable to tax, and tax is to be deducted only on that proportion; (vi) persons deducting/collecting must issue certificates to deductees/collectees specifying amount, rate and other prescribed particulars within prescribed period; and (vii) the AO may cancel issued certificates after giving reasonable opportunity.

      Interpretation

      The text indicates a legislative intent to provide administrative relief and certainty to withholding and collection regimes by enabling assessment-level certificates that modify withholding/collection obligations. The recurring phrase "subject to the rules made under this Act" and "in such form and manner as prescribed" evidences that detailed procedure, forms, timelines and the content of certificates are intended to be governed by delegated legislation (rules/notifications). The AO's power is conditioned on satisfaction as to the payee's/collectee's income which implies an income-driven standard for relief. The Bill focuses on "lower" deduction/collection; it does not expressly contemplate "no deduction" relief in the operative phrase, which may inform a narrower interpretive approach unless clarified by rules.

      Exceptions/Provisos

      No explicit exceptions or provisos are set out besides the parenthetical exclusion in sub-section (2) that excludes salary from the non-resident proportionate-determination procedure. Temporal limits, validity periods, appeal mechanisms, or conditions for issuance (other than AO satisfaction) are Not stated in the document and are left to prescribed rules.

      Illustrations

      • Illustration 1: A resident payee who anticipates low total income applies to the AO for a certificate for lower deduction on interest receipts. If the AO is satisfied, a certificate is issued specifying a reduced withholding rate which the payer must apply until the certificate expires. (This is consistent with clause text.)
      • Illustration 2: A buyer procuring goods who is statutorily liable to collect tax at source believes its total income justifies collection at a lower rate; it applies to the AO and, upon satisfaction, obtains a certificate specifying the lower collection rate to be applied during the certificate's validity. (This follows clause (3).)
      • Illustration 3: A payer to a non-resident (other than salary) considers that only a portion of a payment is taxable; it applies for a determination of the chargeable proportion, and tax is withheld only on the determined taxable proportion. (This paraphrases clause (2).)

      Interplay

      The clause expressly defers details to rules under the Act ("subject to the rules made under this Act", "in such form and manner as prescribed", "as prescribed"). Interaction with other provisions in the Chapter is implied (references to section 392 and 393 appear elsewhere in the Chapter), but cross-references or procedural interlocks (appeal to AO, review, scope of AO's satisfaction, or relation to assessment proceedings) are Not stated in the document. The clause imposes obligations on persons responsible for deduction/collection that will operate in conjunction with other statutory provisions on tax payment, return filing and crediting; specifics of those interactions are Not stated in the document.

      Differences between Document 1 (Section 395 of the Income-tax Act, 2025) and Document 2 (Clause 395 of the Income Tax Bill, 2025 (Old Version))

      • Document 1 (Act) expressly permits the payee to apply for "deduction of income-tax at a lower rate or no deduction of income-tax, as the case may be" (i.e., includes expressly the possibility of no deduction). Document 2 (Bill) refers only to application "for deduction of tax at a lower rate" (no explicit reference to "no deduction").
        • Practical impact: The Act text broadens the express relief available to payees to include certificates for nil deduction; the Bill text is narrower on its face and may be read as not authorising certificates of nil deduction. This affects taxpayers seeking a certificate for no deduction - under the Bill text that position is not explicitly available.
      • Terminology consistency: Document 1 consistently uses "income-tax" and "income or sum" and in sub-section (2) refers to "any sum as mentioned in section 393(2) (Table: Sl. No. 17)". Document 2 uses "tax" and in sub-section (2) says "any sum chargeable under this Act (other than salary)".
        • Practical impact: The Act version narrows the cross-reference to a specific table entry (section 393(2) Table Sl. No. 17) while the Bill uses a broader phrase but excludes salary expressly. Depending on interpretation, the Act's wording may limit the special procedure to the specific listed sum; the Bill may appear broader but excludes salary. This difference can affect which non-resident payments qualify for the proportionate determination procedure.
      • Sub-section (1)(b) standard of satisfaction: Document 1 states the Assessing Officer is to be "satisfied that the total income of the payee justifies deduction of income-tax at a lower rate or no deduction of income-tax"; Document 2 states the AO is to be "satisfied that the total income of the payee justifies a lower deduction".
        • Practical impact: The Act text reiterates both lower rate and nil deduction as possible outcomes; the Bill text only contemplates a lower deduction. The practical standard of satisfaction is similar but the outcome set contemplated differs.
      • Sub-section (2) scope and wording differences: Document 1 sub-section (2)(a) refers to "any sum as mentioned in section 393(2) (Table: Sl. No. 17)"; Document 2 refers to "any sum chargeable under this Act (other than salary)". Document 1's (2)(a) includes prescribed form and manner "where he considers that the whole of such sum would not be chargeable"; Document 2 similar but adds "(other than salary)".
        • Practical impact: The Act text ties the provision to a specific listed sum (Table Sl. No. 17) whereas the Bill text appears to target any sum chargeable (excluding salary). This can change which categories of non-resident receipts can seek proportionate determination for withholding purposes.
      • Typographical/grammatical variations: Document 2 has a stray duplicated semicolon in sub-section (3)(a) ("and;") and slightly different phrasing like "such income or amount" vs "such income or sum". Document 1 cleans up some language and explicitly includes "no income-tax" phrasing in (1)(c) and "(3)(c)".
        • Practical impact: Minor; Act wording is clearer and more explicit on nil deduction/collection and on the objects to which the certificate may apply.

      Practical Implications

      • Compliance and risk areas: Persons responsible for deducting/collecting must implement processes to accept and act upon AO-issued certificates; failure to deduct/collect at the certified rate may attract liability. Payees/collectees seeking relief must ensure accurate disclosure of total income to the AO since the AO's satisfaction is income-based. The Bill text's omission of explicit authorization for "nil deduction" certificates may create additional risk or administrative friction for taxpayers seeking complete exemption from deduction unless rules clarify otherwise.
      • Record-keeping/evidence: The clause requires issuers of certificates (deductors/collectors and employers) to issue documentary certificates specifying amounts and rates within prescribed periods; accordingly, taxpayers should retain certificate copies, AO orders, correspondence, and records demonstrating reliance on certificates and corresponding withholding/collection actions. Specific retention periods and form content are Not stated in the document and are expected to be prescribed.

      Key Takeaways

      • Clause 395 establishes an AO-based certificate mechanism to vary withholding/collection rates where the AO is satisfied about the applicant's total income.
      • It provides a special procedure for payers to non-residents (excluding salary in the Bill) to determine the proportion of sums chargeable and limit withholding accordingly.
      • Deductors/collectors and certain employers must issue certificates to deductees/collectees specifying amounts, rates and other prescribed particulars within prescribed periods.
      • Details of forms, manner, validity, timelines and other procedural rules are left to subordinate legislation and are not specified in the clause.
      • The Bill text does not expressly mention certificates for "no deduction" (nil deduction), which narrows the express relief compared with later Act wording that does include nil deduction; this may affect taxpayers seeking complete exemption from withholding unless clarified by rules.
      • The Assessing Officer may cancel issued certificates after giving reasonable opportunity; grounds and procedure for cancellation beyond opportunity to be heard are Not stated in the document.

      Full Text:

      Section 395 Certificates.

      Topics

      ActsIncome Tax