Loading...

⚠ ✕
❮ 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 characters 0/2000
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 ✕
🔎 Filters / Advanced Search ❯
TEXT

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.
Relevance Default Date
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Through Reimbursement Expenses, DDT Refunds, and Transfer Pricing Adjustments
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Financial Distress: A Legal Analysis of Progressive Tax Instalment Judgments
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Deciphering Tax Implications on Capital Reduction: Navigating the Complexities of Section 115QA in I...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Interpreting Section 153A: ITAT Delhi's Stand on Incriminating Material in Assessments: Assessments ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reaffirming the Bounds of Section 153A: Analysis of Delhi High Court's Approach: Assessment post sea...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Navigating Rectification and Revised Returns: Legal Insights from ITAT Bangalore's Ruling
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Mutual Fund Gains and Deemed Dividends: Analyzing the Delhi High Court's Landmark Judgment
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Reassessing Income under Section 147 Post-Quashment of Sections 153A/153C: The Waiver of Limitation ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Section 153A of the Income Tax Act: A Critical Analysis of the Supreme Court's Interpretation in the...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Clarity and Precision in Tax Penalty Proceedings: Insights from a High Court Judgment
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Jurisdictional Challenges in Tax Assessments: Insights from a Recent ITAT Decision
    Case Laws Income Tax
    High Court Rules on the Invalidity of Reassessment Notices Issued to a Deceased Person
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Long-Term Capital Gains and Unexplained Cash Credits in Stock Transactions: A Legal Perspective
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Judicial Approach in Transfer Pricing and PE Attribution: Analysis of a Landmark Case: Legal Perspec...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Scrutinizing the Application of Mind in Tax Assessments: Examining the Role of ACIT while granting a...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    TDS Obligations and DTAA: Clarifying Tax Jurisdiction in International Telecom Services
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Distinction Between Business Income and Deemed Income in Income Tax Assessments: Higher rate of tax ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Analysis of ITAT's Decision on Surplus Stock Taxation
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Validity of Notices / orders without DIN. The Critical Role of Procedural Compliance in Tax Administ...
    Case Laws Income Tax
    Tax Exemptions: Capitation Fees in Educational Institutions: A Legal Quagmire
❮
❯
❯❯
Maximize Maximize Maximize
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 Summaries Hide All Summaries
Case Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Capital reduction transactions treated outside buyback levy when executed pre amendment; buyback tax not attracted.
The Tribunal held that the capital reduction did not qualify as a buyback for purposes of the buyback tax provision because the transaction was completed before the amendment that broadened the provision's definition; relying on precedents distinguishing capital reduction from buybacks, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's tax avoidance contention and emphasised that the transaction date governs applicability of the amended definition.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Incriminating material requirement: Section 153A assessments require material specific to the assessee, not unrelated third party statements.
Assessments following search operations must be grounded on incriminating material specifically linked to the assessee; material or statements derived from separate or third party search proceedings cannot, alone, serve as incriminating material against an unrelated assessee. Absent assesseespecific incriminating material, additions and disallowances in such assessments lack justification and cannot properly form the basis of adverse tax adjustments.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Admissibility of search statements: corroborative evidence required before additions in post-search tax assessments.
Statements recorded under Section 132(4) have evidentiary value but cannot alone justify additions under Section 153A; corroborative material discovered during the search is required, and taxpayers must be afforded the opportunity to cross-examine and rebut adverse statements before assessments under Section 153A are finalized.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Rectification under Section 154: procedural lapses should not bar correction of apparent errors in tax returns.
Interpretation of Section 154 treats misplacement of figures in an original return as a mistake apparent from the record, qualifying for statutory rectification; a revised return filed as a genuine corrective attempt may be recognised despite procedural lapses, and tax authorities should balance procedural compliance with the need to remedy apparent errors and assist taxpayers in claiming corrections.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Classification of Mutual Fund Gains: affirmed as capital gains, clarifies tests distinguishing business income and scope of deemed dividends.
Classification of gains from mutual fund redemptions turns on intent, transaction frequency, holding period, accounting treatment and the factual matrix to determine capital gains versus business income. Distinguishing genuine capital contributions from transactions that function as distributions is essential before treating receipts as deemed dividends; absent characteristics of a loan or advance against profits, capital infusions should not be recharacterised as dividends.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Reopening assessments under Section 147 requires proper review when Section 150(2) waiver is contested, not clarification.
Reopening of assessments under Section 147 concerns whether the Assessing Officer has a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment and is subject to procedural safeguards including issuance of a statutory notice. Where prior assessments made in consequence of a search under provisions for search-based assessment were quashed, the question arises whether fresh proceedings may be initiated for income not arising from incriminating material found in the search and whether the limitation period can be waived under Section 150(2) to permit issuance of a notice for reassessment.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Scope of assessment post-search: completed assessments permit additions only from incriminating material found during searches.
The Supreme Court clarified that for assessments completed before a search, the Assessing Officer's power to reassess within the retrospective period is constrained: any additions in such completed assessments must be based on incriminating material discovered during the search, thereby limiting use of search powers to matters tied to the unearthed evidence and preventing expansion of assessments on unrelated material.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Specificity in penalty notices: requirement to identify exact charge prevents defective proceedings and safeguards procedural fairness.
Applicability of penalty for concealment or furnishing inaccurate particulars requires the assessing officer to specify the exact limb under which proceedings are initiated; absence of that specificity renders the penalty notice defective, undermines procedural fairness, and justifies setting aside the penalty, thereby obliging tax authorities to adhere to precise notice requirements when invoking penal provisions.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Jurisdictional validity of tax notice: lack of proper jurisdiction can vitiate assessment proceedings and nullify further action.
The dominant operative point is that a valid scrutiny assessment under Section 143(2) requires issuance by an officer with lawful jurisdiction determined by income thresholds and administrative instructions; failure in jurisdictional competence can render the notice and ensuing assessment proceedings invalid. Procedural fairness-specifically the opportunity to be heard-is a corollary concern, and while issues regarding additions under Section 69A and the tax effect of Section 115BBE are raised, they become academic if the initiation itself is found jurisdictionally flawed.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Validity of reassessment notices: notices issued to a deceased person are void and must be directed to the correct legal entity.
The High Court held that reassessment notices issued in the name of a deceased assessee are null and void, constituting substantive illegality when directed to a non-existent person; the court emphasized that the correct legal entity must be addressed, that the legal heir's communications and filings were material, and that procedural protections and statutory reopening procedures cannot be bypassed due to administrative or IT constraints.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Long-term capital gains preserved where transaction records establish genuineness; mere broker misconduct is insufficient evidence.
The issue is whether gains from sale of low-priced shares are long-term capital gains or unexplained cash credits under Section 68. The authorities suspected accommodation entries via a broker with a tainted history, but transaction documents-bills, bank payments and contract notes-were held to establish genuineness. Mere suspicion of broker misconduct was deemed insufficient without direct evidence linking the assessee to contrived entries; evidentiary standards and fair hearing obligations were decisive.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Permanent establishment attribution: precedent-driven analysis limits taxable profit allocation to where core value is created in digital services.
The principal issue is attribution of profits to a Permanent Establishment for cross-border digital reservation services, requiring a fact-sensitive analysis of where core business activities and value creation occur; judicial reasoning relied on materially similar precedent to determine the appropriate share of revenue attributable to the PE, stressing that a mere business connection or digital presence does not automatically justify full profit allocation to the jurisdiction and that clear tracing of value creation is essential to avoid double taxation.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Application of mind in tax approvals: inadequate ACIT scrutiny under Section 153D can invalidate assessments.
The core issue is whether the ACIT, when granting approval under Section 153D, performed a genuine application of mind by scrutinising assessment records and search material; the Tribunal and High Court found the approval lacked adequate examination, leading to inconsistencies between additions made by the assessing officer and the assessed income, and rendering the assessment unreliable. The matter was treated as factual rather than presenting a substantial question of law.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Royalty characterisation: cross-border telecom payments not taxable as royalty, limiting TDS and extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Payments by an Indian telecom operator to non-resident carriers for interconnectivity and capacity transfers are not to be characterised as royalty under the applicable DTAA and therefore do not attract TDS; DTAA interpretation governs characterization, Indian jurisdiction is limited over extra territorial income where the foreign entities lack a taxable presence, and retrospective amendments do not impose tax on past transactions compliant with the law at the time.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Deemed income classification denied where surrendered receipts are linked to business activities, avoiding higher tax rate.
Where surrendered cash, advances and stock discrepancies identified in a survey are linked to ordinary business activities and the assessee supplies specific explanations of source and nexus, the deeming provisions for unexplained investments and unrecorded ownership do not automatically apply; accordingly the higher-rate taxation applicable to incomes classified as deemed income is inapplicable and the amounts are treated as business income for tax purposes.
Case Laws Income Tax
Show AI Summary
Surplus stock classification: accounting linkage to business determines treatment as business income over unexplained investment.
Classification of surplus stock found during a section 133A survey depends on its nexus with ordinary trading and documentary accounting. Where excess inventory is recorded in the stock register and credited to partners' capital account, these accounting entries indicate it forms part of regular business stock and support treatment as business income rather than unexplained investment under section 69B, affecting applicability of special tax treatment under section 115BBE.
Case Laws Income 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 Laws Income 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.

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

Showing Results for :
Reset Filters
No Records Found

TMI Notes

Back

All TMI Notes

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

Acts Income Tax